Cahill v. Rushen’s Empirical Analysis
678 F.2d 791 · 1982
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently May 2024 · most notably United States v. Willard (1990), 36 Cal. 3d 724 - People v. Whitt (1984)
15 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Johnson v. Zerbst · Gideon v. Wainwright · United States v. Wade · Edwards v. Arizona
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“any incriminating statements deliberately elicited by the State without at least affording defendant the opportunity to consult with counsel, must be excluded at any subsequent trial on the charges for which defendant [wa]s then under indictment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The fundamental role of the right to counsel is to guarantee assistance of counsel at trial, when the defendant is confronted with both the intricacies of the law and the advocacy and power of the state.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[e]ven a brief consultation with his attorney would have corrected Cahill's erroneous impression that a confession at that point could have no adverse consequences.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.