Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 631 SW2D 534 - Combs v. State

Combs v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
May 1983
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Culombe v. Connecticut · Rogers v. Richmond · Blackburn v. Alabama · United States v. Ballard

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

  1. ““1) When the rights were read to him he left his head bowed, not looking at the person reading him those warnings; “2) The appellant only looked up on occasions at a pause or resistance or on a request; “3) The appellant is a mentally retarded individual who had a functioning age level of 5 to 8 years; “4) The appellant had an intelligence score from 55 to 70; “5) The appellant had been placed in at least two mentally retarded homes or schools; “6) The appellant had difficulty in remembering; “7) The appellant might be able to understand if large amounts of time were taken with him; “8) The appellant might be able to understand if simple words were used with him; “9) The appellant was taking medications prescribed for him of 50 mgs. thorazine; “10) The appellant was unable to read or write (which fact was determined by an assistant district attorney before the confession was taken); “11) The appellant was asked at a point in the confession if he wanted to say anything else concerning the death of a child to which he replied ‘no’; and then shortly thereafter, a new line of interrogation and replies thereto were recorded; and “12) When the appellant was asked about his understanding of his rights and about the provisions of the warnings, such as the use of such terms as ‘used in evidence in court,’ ‘appointed,’ ‘lawyer,’ etc., the appellant did not know what they were or what they meant.””
    1 later decision 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.