Commonwealth v. Molina’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““[I]s it mandatory that I mention a name? Because if I . . . truly, if I had known that this would be like this, I honestly would have brought an attorney because I truly don’t even know what has happened; I haven’t been informed of what has happened and I am being questioned about, really, I mean, it’s like my rights are being violated because I am being questioned on something that I truly don’t know ... I mean because . . . .””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Molina

2. “[t]he passage reads as though the defendant was using the specter of his rights as a way to control the interview: not asserting the rights, but mentioning them in order to avoid specific questions that he did not want to answer”

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

3. “-were ambiguous. "Although [the defendant] mentioned an attorney, he did not request one going forward. He said that he would have brought an attorney.”

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