681 So. 2d 469 - State v. Green’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “A voluntary, spontaneous statement is admissible without Miranda warnings, even if the defendant is in custody when the statement is made. State v. Lee, 95-1398, p. 2 (La.App. 4 Cir. 8/23/95), 660 So.2d 911 . In the present case none of the statements suppressed by the trial court were in response to any questioning about the murder. The defendant's first statements were unresponsive to the general questions the officers were asking the defendant while booking him. See State v. Poche, 524 So.2d 189 (La. App. 4 Cir.1988). The defendant's statements were not the product of an interrogation but rather were the defendant's spontaneous admissions. The officers' failure to advise the defendant of his rights at the time he first began making his statements did not render the statements involuntary. State v. Green, 96-0969, pp. 2-3 (La. App. 4th Cir. 9/25/96), 681 So.2d 469, 470 , writ denied, 96-2610 (La.6/20/97), 695 So.2d 1348 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 750 So. 2d 343 - State v. Green