Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 437 F.2d 1153 - Klamert v. Cupp

Klamert v. Cupp’s Empirical Analysis

437 F.2d 1153 · 1970

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
4
states following
January 2016
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 3 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently January 2016

11 federal appellate · 3 district · 4 state decisions

16019701980199020002010decided

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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Lowe v. United States · Camacho v. United States · State v. Klamert

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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The fundamental import of tbe privilege while an individual is in custody is not whether he is allowed to talk to the police without the benefit of warnings and counsel, but whether he can be interrogated. There is no requirement that police stop a person who enters a police station and states that he wishes to confess to a crime, or a person who calls the police to offer a confession or any other statement he desires to make. Volunteered statements of any kind are not barred by the Fifth Amendment and their admissibility is not affected by our holding today.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Under Miranda, however, statements volunteered by a defendant, even though in custody, free from interrogation or other coercion, are still admissible regardless of the absence of warnings of rights.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.