Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 52 N.J. 352 - State v. Magee

State v. Magee’s Empirical Analysis

1968

Citation profile

43
cited by 43 later decisions
8
states following
April 2019
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 2 district · 35 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably State v. Hartley (1986), State v. McZorn (1975)

5 federal appellate · 2 district · 35 state decisions

270196819701980199020002010decided

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 · Escobedo v. Illinois · Johnson v. State of New Jersey · Garrity v. State of New Jersey · State v. Coleman

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

  1. “[o]nce Miranda 's rule has been complied with at the threshold of the questioning it is not necessary as a matter of law to repeat the warnings at each successive interview. [ Id. at 374].”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “It is common knowledge that Escobedo was the subject of much discussion in newspapers, law reviews, periodicals and on television and radio. But more significantly, this Court in 1965 pointed to the widespread belief in academic and other circles * * * that the Supreme Court * * * [would] in due course eliminate all confessions by unrepresented suspects in custody. [Citation omitted]. Although such a drastic innovation was not adopted, nevertheless the trend toward more protective measures to assure the voluntariness of confessions had become so apparent that the per se rule of exclusion could reasonably have been anticipated prior to its crystallization in Miranda . Moreover, long prior to Miranda our Court had declared that failure of the police to advise a suspect of his right to counsel is one of the factors to be considered on the issue of voluntariness of a confession.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “whether the suspect understood that he did not have to speak, the consequences of speaking, and that he had the right to counsel before doing so if he wished.”
    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.