Lindgren v. Lane’s Empirical Analysis
925 F.2d 198 · 1991
Citation profile
32 federal appellate · 2 district · 16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 60 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably United States v. August (1992), Jones v. Lincoln Electric Co. (1999)
32 federal appellate · 2 district · 16 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Chapman v. State of California · Doyle v. Ohio · Greer v. Miller · O’Callahan v. Parker, Warden
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 60 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[The central constitutional inquiry is the 'particular use to which the post-arrest silence is being put. .... Doyle does not impose a prima facie bar against any mention whatsoever of a defendant's right to request counsel, but instead guards against the exploitation of that constitutional right by the prosecutor.'”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“As explained in Greer v. Miller, it is the use of an accused's silence against him at trial by way of specific inquiry or impeachment that forms the basis for a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Doyle and the cases applying the rule against using a defendant’s post-arrest silence against him center the constitutional inquiry around the particular use to which the post-arrest silence is being put. In other words, we must look at the circumstances in which a criminal defendant’s post-arrest silence or request for counsel is revealed in court in order to determine whether the purposes underlying the rule in Doyle have been undermined.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Harmon · Deane v. State
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.