832 So. 2d 730 - Chavez v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 46 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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(a) You have the right to remain silent and you do not have to talk to me if you do not wish to do so. You do not have to answer any of my questions. Do you understand that right? (b) Should you talk to me, anything which you might say may be introduced into evidence in court against you. Do you understand? (c) If you want a lawyer to be present during questioning, at this time or anytime hereafter, you are entitled to have a lawyer present. Do you understand that right? (d) If you cannot afford to pay for a lawyer, one will be provided for you at no cost if you want one. Do you understand that right? Knowing these rights are you willing to answer my questions without having a lawyer present?”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 111 So. 3d 810 - Braddy v. State · 930 So. 2d 802 - Gillis v. State

2. “the victim's mental state may be evaluated for purposes of such determination in accordance with a common-sense inference from the circumstances.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 841 So. 2d 362 - Lynch v. State · 882 So. 2d 943 - Hutchinson v. State

3. “Anderson is clearly distinguishable as there the evidence presented to this Court showed that Anderson had been indicted prior to being taken into custody by Florida law enforcement officials who drove Anderson by car for four days from Minnesota back to Florida. The deputies were aware that Anderson had no counsel in Minnesota and that he desired appointed counsel once returned to Florida. Holding that Anderson's statement should have been suppressed, we found "significant" the fact that the statement at issue came "far after" Anderson should have been brought before a judicial officer "with the attendant advice of rights and appointment of counsel." Id. at 576 . We also found that the record failed to show a valid waiver. Id.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 877 So. 2d 663 - Globe v. State