Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 441 NE2D 194 - Andrews v. State

Andrews v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
3
states following
September 2017
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently September 2017 · most notably Labram v. Havel (1995), Ben-Yisrayl v. State (2000)

2 federal appellate · 29 state decisions

2001982199020002010decided

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 · Terry v. Ohio · Carroll v. United States · Brinegar v. United States · Rhode Island v. Innis

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

  1. “The main concern ... is to afford the juvenile defendant a stabilizing and relaxed atmosphere in which to make a serious decision that could possibly affect the rest of his life.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “""No person shall be held on recognizance or otherwise to answer a criminal charge for a period in aggregate embracing more than one year from the date the criminal charge against such defendant is filed ... except where ... the delay was caused by his act.... Any defendant so held shall, on motion, be discharged."”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “MURDER is defined by Statute in Indiana in pertinent part as follows: A person who knowingly or intentionally kills another human being commits Murder, a felony. A person engages in conduct “intentionally” if, when he engages in the conduct, it is his conscious objective to do so. A person engages in conduct “knowingly” if, when he engages in the conduct, he is aware of a high probability that he is doing so.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.