Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 724 P2D 670 - People v. Wallace

People v. Wallace’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
2
states following
May 2018
most recently cited

1 district · 14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently May 2018

1 district · 14 state decisions

501986199020002010decided

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 · Berkemer v. McCarty · Lego v. Twomey · People v. Thiret · People v. Fish

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

  1. “(aln objective assessment of whether a reasonable person in the suspect's position would believe himself to be deprived of his freedom of action to the degree associated with a formal arrest.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Polander was seized and subjected to a question about the ownership of contraband, under cireumstances in which it was apparent to all that the police had grounds to arrest the occupants of the vehicle. Whether or not the police had announced that her seizure was elevated in their minds from an investigatory stop to an arrest, it is clear that the defendant had every reason to believe that she would not be briefly detained and then released as in the case of an investigatory stop or a stop for a minor offense. Under these cireum-stances the defendant's freedom of action was curtailed to a degree associated with formal arrest.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[t]he time, place and purpose of the encounter; the persons present during the interrogation; the words spoken by the officer to the defendant; the officer’s tone of voice and general demeanor; the length and mood of the interrogation; whether any limitation of movement or other form of restraint was placed on the defendant during the interrogation; the officer’s response to any questions asked by the defendant; whether directions were given to the defendant during the interrogation; and the defendant’s verbal or nonverbal response to such directions.”
    2 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.