State v. Beasley’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Defendant's argument recites a more restrictive rule from past Missouri appellate decisions, that once an accused has invoked his Sixth Amendment right to counsel, police may not initiate subsequent interrogation for the pending offense without notifying counsel or having counsel present. See State v. Dixon , 916 S.W.2d 834 , 837 (Mo. App. W.D. 1995) ; State v. Owens , 827 S.W.2d 226 , 228 (Mo. App. E.D. 1991). These cases are based on a prophylactic rule announced by the United States Supreme Court in [ Jackson , 475 U.S. at 636 , 106 S.Ct. 1404 ], that once attached, subsequent waiver of a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel is presumed involuntary. However, Jackson has since been overruled. See Montejo [, 556 U.S. at 792 , 129 S.Ct. 2079 ]. Further, the Montejo Court specifically rejected the Jackson -based argument that "no represented defendant can ever be approached by the State and asked to consent to interrogation."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Jinkerson

2. “is violated when the State obtains incriminating statements by knowingly circumventing the accused's right to have counsel present in a confrontation between the accused and a state agent.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Jinkerson

3. “Criminal defendants ... have the right to counsel under the Sixth Amendment, which attaches at the time adversary judicial proceedings have been initiated against them.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Jinkerson