Gomez v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The essential justification for the development of the rule espoused in Westmark v. State, supra, is that, once a defendant has been arrested and formally advised of his rights pursuant to Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966), what occurs from that point on is inherently equivocal. One cannot tell whether a failure of the defendant to respond is because he is exercising the constitutional right to remain silent about which he has been formally advised, or whether he simply has nothing to say. The Supreme Court of the United States then says that it is inherently unfair to utilize any of the traditional approaches which had permitted the state to call attention to the defendant's failure to speak when an innocent person reasonably would be expected to offer an explanation. (Emphasis added.)”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Tortolito v. State · Tortolito v. State

2. “[i]n this case there simply was no comment upon Gomez' exercise of his right of silence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Johnson v. State

3. “the defendant ever ask[ed] to be taped so he could preserve that for evidence at trial?”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Johnson v. State