68 Wis. 2d 604 - Klonowski v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 state decisions

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

1. ““ ‘. . . [T]he right to interrogate after arrest is limited and must be for the purpose of determining whether to release the suspect or if he has been arrested without a warrant to make a formal complaint. ... A detention for a period longer than is reasonably necessary for such limited purpose violates due process and renders inadmissible any confession obtained during the unreasonable period of the detention.’ “It was further said (p. 535) : “ . While one may be detained by the police and interrogated to secure sufficient evidence to either charge him with a crime or to release him, the police cannot continue to detain an arrested person to “sew up” the case by obtaining or extracting a confession or culpable statements to support the arrest or the guilt. . . .’ “In Krueger v. State (1972), 58 Wis.2d 345, 357 , 192 N.W.2d 880 , this court clarified the Phillips rule against ‘sew-up’ confessions: “ ‘. . . A confession does not become inadmissible as a “sew-up” confession merely because the state, prior to the confession, had information sufficient to sustain a charge. The question revolves solely on the point whether the delay was inordinate and the detention illegal. . . .’ “This rule was recently reiterated in McAdoo v. State (1974), 65 Wis.2d 596, 609 , 223 N.W.2d 521 : “ ‘Any statement, even if voluntarily given by an accused, will be held inadmissible if made during a period of unreasonably long detention. State v. Estrada (1974), 63 Wis.2d 476, 490 , 217 N.W.2d 359 ; ”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 76 Wis. 2d 313 - Briggs v. State