Jones v. Cardwell’s Empirical Analysis
686 F.2d 754 · 1982
Citation profile
36 federal appellate · 2 district · 18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 63 later decisions — most recently October 2011 · most notably 105 Wash. 2d 175 - State v. Ammons (2005), Baumann v. United States (1982)
36 federal appellate · 2 district · 18 state decisions — followed in 12 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 · Townsend v. Sain · Gault · Malloy v. Hogan · United States v. Tucker
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 63 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““He [the defendant] was instructed that he had no choice but to answer the questions put to him by the probation officer. Because the state was aggressive in extracting a confession from ap-pellee without warning him of the consequences, we hold that appellee’s confession, in the setting in which it occurred, was involuntary.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“This case, like Estelle , involves statements and admissions by an incarcerated defendant to an individual acting on behalf of the state that exposed the defendant to serious consequences. Accordingly we find the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination applicable to the state’s use of appellee’s probation interview.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“by the simple, cruel expedient of forcing it from [Hef-fran's] own lips.”
2 later decisions 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.