Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 696 SO2D 715 - State v. Owen

State v. Owen’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

137
cited by 137 later decisions
10
states following
June 2022
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 134 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 137 later decisions — most recently June 2022 · most notably 803 So. 2d 598 - Connor v. State (2001), 739 So. 2d 568 - Ramirez v. State (1999)

3 federal appellate · 134 state decisions — followed in 10 states

6101997200020102020decided

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 · Edwards v. Arizona · Rhode Island v. Innis · Berkemer v. McCarty · Michigan v. Mosley

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

  1. “[t]his Court has the power to reconsider and correct erroneous rulings in exceptional circumstances and where reliance on the previous decision would result in manifest injustice, notwithstanding that such rulings have become the law of the case.”
    14 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “police in Florida need not ask clarifying questions if a defendant who has received proper Miranda warnings makes only an equivocal or ambiguous request to terminate an interrogation after having validly waived his or her Miranda rights.”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “"Under [article I, section 9, Florida Constitution], if the suspect indicates in any manner that he or she does not want to be interrogated, interrogation must not begin, or, if it has already begun, must immediately stop. If the suspect indicates in any manner that he or she wants the help of a lawyer, interrogation must not begin until a lawyer has been appointed and is present, or, if it has already begun, must immediately stop until a lawyer is present. Once a suspect has requested the help of a lawyer, no state agent can reinitiate interrogation on any offense throughout the period of custody unless the lawyer is present. . . ." [e.s.]”
    8 later decisions 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.