State v. O'GUINN’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 34 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2000 · most notably State v. Odom (1996), McDougall v. North Carolina (1986)
4 federal appellate · 34 state decisions
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 State v. Williams · State v. Duncan · State v. Dicks · Houston v. State · Monts v. State
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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(b) In capital cases where the defendant has been found to be indigent by the court of record having jurisdiction of the case, such court in an ex parte hearing may in its discretion determine that investigative or expert services or other similar services are necessary to ensure that the constitutional rights of the defendant are properly protected.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. West · State v. Evans“... On August 12th when [O'Guinn] made the statement pertaining to this, it was placed on tape, and at no time to my knowledge did he ever ask for an attorney.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The first contact [TBI] Agent Leach had with the defendant was on August 10, 1983. On that date, Agent Leach contacted defendant’s Alabama appointed counsel in the Ivey case for permission to talk to the defendant. He was given permission to talk to the defendant about anything except the Alabama charges for which the attorney had been appointed to represent the defendant. At this time Agent Leach advised the defendant of his Miranda rights.... On August 12, the defendant sent word that he wanted to talk with [Alabama police officer] Duffey and his rights were again read to him from a “Miranda card,” and he indicated that he understood them. During the course of his questioning on the Alabama murder, the defendant mentioned the Jackson, Tennessee incident, at which time Duffey brought Agent Leach in to talk with the Defendant. Duffey advised Leach that he had already informed the defendant of his rights and the defendant affirmed that Duffey had read him his rights and that he was giving his statement freely and voluntarily. A tape recorded statement was made at this time ... Both defendant and Agent Leach agreed that defendant made no request of Agent Leach for an attorney during any of Agent Leach’s interrogations of him.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. O'Guinn
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.