Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 478 NE2D 126 - Butler v. State

Butler v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
March 2012
most recently cited

4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently March 2012

4 state decisions

201985199020002010decided

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 Wong Sun v. United States · McMann v. Richardson · Brown v. Illinois · Dunaway v. New York · Oregon v. Elstad

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

  1. “'It is an unwarranted extension of Miranda to hold that a simple failure to administer the warnings, unaccompanied by any actual coercion or other cireum-stances calculated to undermine the suspect's ability to exercise his free will so taints the investigatory process that a subsequent voluntary and informed waiver is ineffective for some indeterminate period. Though Mirando requires that the unwarned admission must be suppressed, the admissibility of any subsequent statement should turn in these cireumstances solely on whether it is knowingly and voluntarily made. "# * * #k #k a We must conclude that, absent deliberately coercive or improper tactics in obtaining the initial statement, the mere fact that a suspect has made an unwarned admission does not warrant a presumption of compulsion. A subsequent administration of Miranda warnings to a suspect who has given .a voluntary but unwarned statement ordinarily should suffice to remove the conditions that precluded admission of the earlier statement. In such cireumstances, the finder of fact may reasonably conclude that the suspect made a rational and intelligent choice whether to waive or invoke his rights.”
    2 later decisions 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.