United States v. Wright’s Empirical Analysis
962 F.2d 953 · 1992
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 2 district · 22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently June 2021 · most notably State v. Appleby (2009), United States v. LaGrone (1994)
7 federal appellate · 2 district · 22 state decisions — followed in 12 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 Edwards v. Arizona · Moran v. Burbine · McNeil v. Wisconsin · Michigan v. Jackson · Arizona v. Roberson
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“if they 'allow[ed] him to see [his] lawyer now, then they would not be able to ask [him] any further questions and would have to take [him] to jail.' ... The police also told [Kelsey] that 'if [he] was to cooperate and talk with the officers, then they'd take it easy on [him]....' " Id. (alteration in original). Kelsey was not questioned at this point, nor was he read his Miranda rights. He was later questioned in his home and made incriminating statements during the interrogation. See id. 10 The Tenth Circuit held that the request by Kelsey for his lawyer was sufficient to invoke the protections of Edwards, even thought the request was made before questioning or the reading of Miranda rights. See id. at 1198-99. Mindful of the requirement that there be "some statement that can reasonably be construed to be expression of a desire for the assistance of an attorney in dealing with custodial interrogation by the police,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Alston v. Redman“[t]o extend Miranda - Edwards protection as [the defendant] urges would, on the other hand, make it virtually impossible for any defendant charged with one crime ever to be questioned about unrelated criminal activity, if, the first time in court on the first offense charged, he asked for counsel to be present at future interviews. This would not serve the prophylactic purposes of Miranda”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he request by [the defendant's] counsel at a plea hearing to be present at interviews with her client did not trigger the Miranda- Edwards rule for subsequent custodial interrogations regarding unrelated criminal activity.”
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.