Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 76 F.3d 61 - Diaz v. Senkowski

Diaz v. Senkowski’s Empirical Analysis

76 F.3d 61 · 1996

Citation profile

54
cited by 54 later decisions
8
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

19 federal appellate · 1 district · 12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 54 later decisions — most recently June 2019 · most notably Clark v. Murphy (2003), 156 Ohio St. 3d 85 - State v. Tench (2018)

19 federal appellate · 1 district · 12 state decisions

310199620002010decided

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

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Edwards v. Arizona · Chevron Oil Co. v. Huson · Michigan v. Mosley · Davis 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 54 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “if a suspect makes a reference to an attorney that is ambiguous or equivocal in that a reasonable officer in light of the circumstances would have understood only that the suspect might be invoking the right to counsel.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[T]he primary protection afforded suspects subject to custodial interrogation is the Miranda warnings themselves.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[i]nvocation of the Miranda right to counsel requires, at a minimum, some statement that can reasonably be construed to be an expression of a desire for assistance of an attorney.”
    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.