64 Wis. 2d 485 - Scales v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
109 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 117 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2022 · most notably Welsh v. Wisconsin (1984), 96 Wis. 2d 48 - State v. Rabe (1980)
109 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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 · Escobedo v. Illinois · Schmerber v. State of California · Harrington v. California
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 117 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[The defendant] was under arrest. To say that he was not in custody, either because he was not conscious and did not realize he was arrested or because he was not explicitly told that he .was in custody, is sophistry.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“inhibit the ability of the state to remove drunken drivers from the highway”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““The court in Thomas vacated the sentence and remanded for resentencing because, when the defendant remained silent, ‘ [H] e paid a judicially imposed penalty for exercising his constitutionally guaranteed rights.’ (P. 946) Thomas held that, when the defendant was given the opportunity for allocution following the finding of guilty, the right of appeal remained open to him, and the court, citing numerous United States Supreme Court cases, stated, ‘[A]ppeal is ... an integral part of the trial system for finally adjudicating the guilt or innocence of a defendant.’ (P. 945) Thomas held that a defendant, even after conviction, could not he compelled to pay a price for the retention of his fifth amendment rights. In the instant case, Scales was obliged to pay that price.””
2 later decisions 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.