Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 687 SW2D 155 - State v. Beck

State v. Beck’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

41
cited by 41 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
7
states following
May 2007
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 35 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 41 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2007 · most notably Moran v. Burbine (1986), State v. Parker (1994)

3 federal appellate · 35 state decisions

170198519902000decided

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 · Johnson v. Zerbst · Edwards v. Arizona · Rhode Island v. Innis · Kirby v. Illinois

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

  1. “At the time [Beck’s] statements were made, the only document that had been filed was an affidavit sworn out by the prosecuting attorney — for the sole purpose of securing an arrest warrant with which to apprehend [Beck] who was over one-thousand miles away in Florida. [Beck] would have us color this ex parte event as the initiation of adversary judicial proceedings sufficient to trigger his Sixth Amendment right to counsel. In Morris v. State, 532 S.W.2d 455 (Mo. banc 1976), this Court, citing Kirby with approval, determined that the issuance of an arrest warrant did not amount to the initiation of adversary judicial proceedings — as defined within the framework of Kirby .... ... [Beck] was the subject of an arrest warrant — and not the subject of a formal charge in the nature of an indictment or information.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “In light of the careful attention the deputies gave to insuring that defendant was properly informed of his Miranda rights, his unequivocal responses and determined conduct, evince nothing less than a deliberate, firm, knowing, and intelligent choice to speak without the prior counsel of Ms. Hendrix or any other attorney”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Determining whether a waiver constitutes a `knowing and intelligent relinquishment or abandonment of a known right or privilege, [is] a matter which depends in each case `upon the particular facts and circumstances surrounding that case, including the background, experience, and conduct of the accused.'”
    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.