Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 973 F.2d 1198 - Self v. Collins

Self v. Collins’s Empirical Analysis

973 F.2d 1198 · 1992

Citation profile

57
cited by 57 later decisions
1
states following
August 2016
most recently cited

34 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently August 2016 · most notably State v. Correa (1997), United States v. Garcia Abrego (1998)

34 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

310199220002010decided

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 · Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · Johnson v. Zerbst

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

  1. “[T]he Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment [prohibits] states from securing criminal convictions through the use of involuntary confessions resulting from coercive police conduct.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “When ... a trial court fails to render express findings on credibility but makes a ruling that depends upon an implicit determination that credits one witness’s testimony as being truthful, or implicitly discredits another’s, such determinations are entitled to the same presumption of correctness that they would have been accorded had they been made explicitly.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “In addition to the due process prohibition against the use of coerced confessions, the now-familiar procedural safeguards established in [ Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966)] also protect an accused's Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination during custodial interrogation.”
    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.