53 Cal. 2d 160 - People v. Atchley’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 federal appellate · 2 district · 204 state decisions

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

1. ““The People contend, however, that the voluntary nature of defendant’s statements was adequately shown before the recording was admitted into evidence. Travers testified that no threats were made, that no inducements were offered, and that in an earlier conversation defendant had volunteered substantially the same statements without being asked. Defendant at no time contradicted this testimony or suggested that any of his recorded statements were untrue. Moreover, the recorded conversation demonstrates that Travers referred to the insurance policy to explain why he was asking questions and not as an inducement for any particular answers. The trial court listened to the tape in chambers before ruling on its admissibility. There is therefore no merit in defendant’s contention that the recording was admitted without a proper showing that his statements were made voluntarily. “Defendant also contends that the recording was obtained by such fraud that its use as evidence was inconsistent with due process. He relies primarily on Leyra v. Denno, 347 U.S. 556 , 74 S.Ct. 716 , 98 L.Ed. 948 . In that case the police, having promised a suspect medical treatment for an acutely painful attack of sinus, introduced as the ‘doctor’ a highly skilled psychiatrist with a considerable knowledge of hypnosis. The psychiatrist used threats, promises of leniency, and expressions of sympathy to reduce the physically exhausted suspect to almost trance-like submission. Use of his resulting confessions ”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Wilson v. Atchley · Lawrence E. Wilson, Warden v. Veron Atchley

2. “... The elements necessary to constitute lying in wait are watching, waiting, and concealment from the person killed with the intention of inflicting bodily injury upon such person or of killing such person... .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Moser v. State · State v. Brooks

3. ““Defendant was also asked on cross-examination to demonstrate certain aspects of his alleged struggle with his wife. He argues that this demonstration violated his privilege against self-incrimination and that it was not proper cross-examination because not restricted to matters about which he was examined in chief. * * * The entire demonstration, therefore, was within the scope of permissible cross-examination * * *, and defendant waived his privilege against self-incrimination as to the matters involved when he voluntarily raised them on direct examination.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Taylor