Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 580 F.2d 202 - Maglio v. Jago

Maglio v. Jago’s Empirical Analysis

580 F.2d 202 · 1978

Citation profile

66
cited by 66 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
14
states following
June 2005
most recently cited

26 federal appellate · 3 district · 24 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 66 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2005 · most notably Nash v. Estelle (1979), United States v. Fouche (1985)

26 federal appellate · 3 district · 24 state decisions — followed in 14 states

4101978198019902000decided

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 · Wong Sun v. United States · Johnson v. Zerbst · Gault · Brewer v. Williams

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

  1. “"The burden is on the State to establish waiver in every case in which it seeks to introduce a statement taken without the presence of counsel. That burden becomes far more difficult, if not impossible, to sustain when the record shows that a request for counsel was made which was not honored before questioning continued."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “... The State argues that even if the earlier statement was admissible, the later statement, following a careful reexplanation of Maglio’s rights, should be admissible. We commend the care with which the prosecutor explained Maglio’s rights to him, but nonetheless, the request to see an attorney remained unhonored, and the taped interrogation followed within less than an hour of the illegal questioning.... ****** ... In this case, the condition which makes the first confession inadmissible, the failure to provide counsel to an accused during an interrogation, had not yet been removed. Therefore, the recorded statement is equally inadmissible.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “a suspect requests to have counsel present during questioning, but the police ignore the request and continue questioning until he finally confesses, ... a knowing waiver is very difficult, if not impossible, to establish.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.