Barber v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
38 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently November 2018 · most notably Kemp v. State (1992), Jones v. State (1992)
38 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Wong Sun v. United States · Jackson v. Denno · Brown v. Illinois · Dusky v. United States
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.
“[E]ven if the statements in this case were found to be voluntary under the Fifth Amendment, the Fourth Amendment issue remains. In order for the causal chain, between the illegal arrest and the statements made subsequent thereto, to be broken [,] Wong Sun requires not merely that the statement meet the Fifth Amendment standard of voluntariness but that it be ‘sufficiently an act of free will to purge the primary taint’.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Jones v. State · Jefferson v. State“Raising the Issue of Incompetency to Stand Trial Sec. 2. (a) The issue of the defendant’s incompetency to stand trial shall be determined in advance of the trial on the merits if the court determines there is evidence to support a finding of incompetency to stand trial on its own motion or on written motion by the defendant or his counsel filed prior to the date set for trial on the merits asserting that the defendant is incompetent to stand trial. (b) If during the trial evidence of the defendant’s incompetency is brought to the attention of the court from any source, the court must conduct a hearing out of the presence of the jury to determine whether or not there is evidence to support a finding of incompetency to stand trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Morrison v. State“The temporal proximity of the arrest and the confession, the presence of intervening circumstances ... and particularly, the purpose and flagrancy of the official misconduct are all relevant. See Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. at 491 , 9 L.Ed.2d 441 , 83 S.Ct. 407, 419 . (Emphasis supplied).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Jefferson v. State
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.