green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
7.1 score
“n assertion of the right to counsel need not be explicit, unequivocal, or made with unmistakable clarity," but not "every reference to an attorney, no matter how vague, indecisive, or ambiguous, should constitute an invocation of the right to counsel”
Treatment trajectory · 1982 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1982
2004
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 22 distinct citers.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
State v. Lopez
n assertion of the right to counsel need not be explicit, unequivocal, or made with unmistakable clarity," but not "every reference to an attorney, no matter how vague, indecisive, or ambiguous, should constitute an invocation of the right to counsel
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Sundstrom
See People v. Krueger, 82 Ill. 2d 305, 311 , 412 N.E.2d 537, 540 (1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1019 (1981) (every reference to an attorney does not constitute an invocation of the right to counsel).
discussed
Cited "see"
Samples v. City Of Atlanta
Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a); see Williams v. Kelley, 624 F.2d 695, 698 (5th Cir.1980) (binding on this circuit under Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206 (11th Cir.1981) (en banc)), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1019 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
Samples v. City of Atlanta
Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a); see Williams v. Kelley, 624 F.2d 695, 698 (5th Cir.1980) (binding on this circuit under Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206 (11th Cir.1981) (en banc)), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1019 (1981).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Koput
See People v. Krueger, 412 N.E.2d 537, 540 (Ill. 1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1019 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
Maddox v. City of Los Angeles
See Williams v. Kelley, 624 F.2d 695, 697 (5th Cir.1980) (quoting Johnson v. Glick, 481 F.2d 1028, 1033 (2d Cir.) (Friendly, J.), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 1033 , 94 S.Ct. 462 , 38 L.Ed.2d 324 (1973)) (the constitutionality of the use of a choke hold on a prisoner depended upon “such factors as the need for the application of force, the relationship between the need and the amount of force that was used, the extent of injury inflicted, and whether force was applied in a good-faith effort to maintain or restore discipline or maliciously and sadistically for the very purpose of causing harm”), …
discussed
Cited "see"
Maddox v. City of Los Angeles
See Williams v. Kelley, 624 F.2d 695, 697 (5th Cir.1980) (quoting Johnson v. Glick, 481 F.2d 1028, 1033 (2d Cir.) (Friendly, J.), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 1033 , 94 S.Ct. 462 , 38 L.Ed.2d 324 (1973)) (the constitutionality of the use of a choke hold on a prisoner depended upon "such factors as the need for the application of force, the relationship between the need and the amount of force that was used, the extent of injury inflicted, and whether force was applied in a good-faith effort to maintain or restore discipline or maliciously and sadistically for the very purpose of causing harm"), cert…
cited
Cited "see"
Gary Lee Rymer and Deborah Ann Rymer v. Douglas County
See Williams v. Kelley, 624 F.2d 695, 697 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1019 , 101 S.Ct. 3009 , 69 L.Ed.2d 391 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
People v. Smith
(2×)
Ed. 2d 76 , 97 S. Ct. 58 ; Singleton v. State (Fla. App. 1977), 344 So. 2d 911, 912-13 ; State v. Nash (1979), 119 N.H. 728, 731 , 407 A.2d 365, 367 ) or by limiting further questioning strictly to an attempt to clarify any bona fide doubt the officer may still have as to whether the defendant desires counsel (State v. Moulds (1983), 105 Idaho 880, 889 , 673 P.2d 1074, 1083 ; see People v. Krueger (1980), 82 Ill. 2d 305, 311 , cert. denied (1981), 451 U.S. 1019 , 69 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Cannady v. State
See People v. Krueger, 82 Ill.2d 305 , 45 Ill.Dec. 186 , 412 N.E.2d 537 (1980) (defendant's remark variously described as "Maybe I ought to have an attorney," "Maybe I need a lawyer," and "Maybe I ought to talk to an attorney," was not a request for counsel), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1019 , 101 S.Ct. 3009 , 69 L.Ed.2d 390 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Joseph A. Siviglia
(2×)
See United States v. Butler, 636 F.2d 727 , 729 n.** (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1019 , 101 S.Ct. 3010 , 69 L.Ed.2d 392 ; United States v. Hays, 454 F.2d 274, 275 (9th Cir.).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Walkowiak
(2×)
See, e.g., People v. Krueger, 412 N.E.2d 537, 540 (Ill. 1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1019 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Dobson
See, e.g., People v. Krueger, 82 Ill. 2d 305, 311 , 412 N.E.2d 537, 540 (1980) (‘[a]n assertion of the right to counsel need not be explicit, unequivocal, or made with unmistakable clarity,’ but not ‘every reference to an attorney, no matter how vague, indecisive or ambiguous, should constitute an invocation of the right to counsel’), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1019 , [ 101 S. Ct. 3009 , 69 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Hill
Thompson v. Wainwright, 601 F.2d 768, 772 (5th Cir.1979); Nash v. Estelle, 597 F.2d 513 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 981 , 100 S.Ct. 485 , 62 L.Ed.2d 409 (1979); see also People v. Krueger, 82 Ill.2d 305, 311 , 45 Ill.Dec. 186, 189 , 412 N.E.2d 537, 540 (1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1019 , 101 S.Ct. 3009 , 69 L.Ed.2d 390 (1981) (quoted in Smith, 469 U.S. at 96 n. 3, 105 S.Ct. at 493 n. 3).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Commonwealth v. Waggoner
See, e.g., People v. Krueger, 82 Ill.2d 305, 311 , [ 45 Ill.Dec. 186 , 412 N.E.2d 537, 540 (1980) (“[A]n assertion of the right to counsel need not be explicit, unequivocal, or made with unmistakable clarity,” but not “every reference to an attorney, no matter how vague, indecisive or ambiguous, should constitute an invocation of the right to counsel”), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1019 , 101 S.Ct. 3009 , 69 L.Ed.2d 390 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Easterling v. City of Glennville
Cf. Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1, 9 , 105 S.Ct. 1694, 1700 , 85 L.Ed.2d 1, 8 (1985) (“The suspect’s fundamental interest in his own life need not be elaborated upon.”); see also Williams v. Kelley, 624 F.2d 695, 697 (5th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1019 , 101 S.Ct. 3009 , 69 L.Ed.2d 391 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Hall v. State
See, e.g., People v Krueger, 82 111 2d 305, 311, 412 NE2d 537, 540 (1980) [‘(A)n assertion of the right to counsel need not be explicit, unequivocal, or made with unmistakable clarity,’ but not ‘every reference to an attorney, no matter how vague, indecisive or ambiguous, should constitute an invocation of the right to counsel’], cert de *272 nied, 451 US 1019 , 69 L Ed 2d 390 , 101 S Ct 3009 (1981).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Hampel v. State
See, e.g., People v. Krueger, 82 Ill.2d 305 , 45 Ill.Dec. 186 , 412 N.E.2d 537, 540 , cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1019 , 101 S.Ct. 3009 , 69 L.Ed.2d 390 (1980). 7 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Hendrickson v. State
(2×)
See, e.g., People v. Krueger, 412 N.E.2d 537, 540 (1980) (“[A]n assertion of the right to counsel need not be explicit, unequivocal, or made with unmistakable clarity,” but not “every reference to an attorney, no matter how vague, indecisive or ambiguous, should constitute an invocation of the right to counsel”), cert. den., 451 U.S. 1019 , 1981.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Smith v. Illinois
(2×)
See, e. g., People v. Krueger, 82 Ill. 2d 305, 311 , 412 N. E. 2d 537, 540 (1980) (“[A]n assertion of the right to counsel need not be explicit, unequivocal, or made with unmistakable clarity,” but not “every reference to an attorney, no matter how vague, indecisive or ambiguous, should constitute an invocation of the right to counsel”), cert. denied, 451 U. S. 1019 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
John Russell Webster, Cross-Appellants v. The City of Houston, Cross-Appellee
See also Williams v. Kelley, 624 F.2d 695, 697 (5th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1019 , 101 S.Ct. 3009 , 69 L.Ed.2d 391 (1981); Hamilton v. Chaffin, 506 F.2d 904, 909 (5th Cir.1975); Johnson v. Glick, 481 F.2d 1028, 1033 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 1033 , 94 S.Ct. 462 , 38 L.Ed.2d 324 (1973). 5 .
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Walker v. Rowe
See also Williams v. Kelley, 624 F.2d 695, 697 (5th Cir. 1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1019 , 101 S.Ct. 3009 , 69 L.Ed.2d 391 (1981); Withers v. Levine, 615 F.2d 158, 162 (4th Cir. 1980).
Krueger
v.
Illinois
v.
Illinois
No. 80-5921.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 26, 1981.
Published
Citer courts: Court of Appeals of Arizona (1)
Sup. Ct. Ill. Cer-tiorari denied.