Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 844 F.2d 1124 - United States v. Chenault

United States v. Chenault’s Empirical Analysis

844 F.2d 1124 · 1988

Citation profile

44
cited by 44 later decisions
May 2017
most recently cited

39 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently May 2017 · most notably United States v. Chaney (1992), United States v. Rochester (1990)

39 federal appellate · 2 district ·

2301988199020002010decided

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 18 U.S.C. § 3237 · 18 U.S.C. § 495

Relies on Berkemer v. McCarty · Oregon v. Mathiason · California v. Beheler · United States v. Beechum · United States v. Pomponio

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

  1. “A suspect is therefore ‘in custody' for Miranda purposes when placed under formal arrest or when a reasonable person in the suspect's position would have understood the situation to constitute a restraint on freedom of movement of the degree which the law associates with formal arrest. The reasonable person through whom we view the situation must be neutral to the environment and to the purposes of the investigation-that is, neither guilty of criminal conduct and thus overly apprehensive nor insensitive to the seriousness of the circumstances.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Whether a defendant is coerced by the belligerance of an officer is a credibility determination to be made by the trial judge.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “A finding of specific intent to deceive categorically excludes a finding of good faith ...”
    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.