673 So. 2d 796 - Johnson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently February 2016
5 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 · Oregon v. Mathiason · Stansbury v. California · 545 So. 2d 820 - Carr v. State · 600 So. 2d 440 - Landreth v. State
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the following factors should be considered:”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Okafor v. State · State v. Jude“In order to decide if a suspect is `in custody,' the court, looking at the totality of the circumstances, must find that a reasonable person in the accused's position would believe that he or she is not free to leave. Landreth [v. State], 600 So.2d [440,] 444 [(Ala.Cr.App.1992)]. "`In deciding whether the questioning of a suspect is "custodial”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“that a reasonable person in Jude's position would not have felt that he was in custody when he gave his statement.”
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.