Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 72 WASHAPP 711 - State v. Schatmeier

State v. Schatmeier’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
December 2011
most recently cited

4 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Fare v. Michael C. · Lawrence Metze v. New York · California v. Prysock

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

  1. “Studies which the petitioners have called to our attention indicate that juveniles often do not understand the full import of the exercise or waiver of their constitutional rights. This is not surprising. Indeed, we would be surprised if many adults can be said to have such comprehension. As this court held in State v. Aiken, 72 Wn.2d 306 , 434 P.2d 10 (1967), the test is whether a person knew he had the right to remain silent, and that anything he said could be used against him in a court of law, not whether he understood the precise legal effect of his admissions. If a juvenile understands that he has a right, after he is told that he has that right, and that his statements can be used against him in a court, the constitutional requirement is met.”
    1 later decision 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.