McMahan v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently February 2022
22 state decisions
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 · Chapman v. State of California · North Carolina v. Butler · Carnley v. Cochran · Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Again we advise law enforcement agencies that, as part of their duty to preserve evidence, it is incumbent upon them to tape record, where feasible, any questioning and particularly that which occurs in a place of detention. Mallott v. State, 608 P.2d 737 , 743 n. 5 (Alaska 1980). Furthermore, as we stated in In re S.B., 614 P.2d 786 , 790 n. 9 (Alaska 1980): It will be a great aid to the trial court’s determinations and our own review of the record if an electronic record of the police interview with a defendant is available from which the circumstances of a confession or other waiver of Miranda rights may be ascertained. In addition, if Miranda rights are read to the defendant, this too should be recorded.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The law of self-defense is designed to afford protection to one who is beset by an aggressor and confronted by a necessity not of his own making. When a defendant has a prior grievance with a deceased and takes a deadly weapon to an encounter with the deceased, the defendant should be deem [sic] to have provoked the violence which resulted in the death of the deceased. This is because the defendant in such a situation knows or reasonably should know that the encounter will result in mortal combat. [Emphasis added.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Klumb v. State“The state’s burden of showing that a confession was voluntary and that the defendant had waived his Miranda rights can be made by a preponderance of the evidence. In determining voluntariness, the court must look to the totality of the circumstances surrounding the defendant’s statements (citations omitted).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Pierce v. State
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.