Endress v. Dugger’s Empirical Analysis
880 F.2d 1244 · 1989
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2018
9 federal appellate · 1 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Rhode Island v. Innis · Sumner v. Mata · Miller v. Fenton · Kuhlmann v. Wilson
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Since the warnings are required only in the situation of a custodial interrogation, many courts have addressed the issues of when a person is in 'custody' or has been 'interrogated' for the purposes of Miranda.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“warnings are required before any statement may be admitted into evidence at trial which was elicited from a person in custody through interrogation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“should know [is] reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response from the suspect.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Jacobs v. Singletary
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.