State v. Kane’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently January 2012
3 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Doyle v. Ohio · Rodriguez v. United States · Gleason v. United States · United States v. Goldman · Vitali v. United States
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A defendant cannot have it both ways. If he talks, what he says or omits is to be judged on its merits or demerits, and not on some artificial standard that only the part that helps him can be later referred to. This was not a case where the government commented upon ... a prior exercise of rights. The government asked the jury to measure what the defendant said when he had no rights because he had voluntarily waived them.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Hunt“Once a defendant decides to speak, [his] failure to speak in exculpation cannot be explained away as a response to Miranda warnings.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Hunt
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.