Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 10 Wash. App. 75 - State v. Simms

10 Wash. App. 75 - State v. Simms’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

59
cited by 59 later decisions
11
states following
May 2016
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 52 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently May 2016 · most notably United States v. Vandemark (1975), Roman v. State (1977)

3 federal appellate · 52 state decisions — followed in 11 states

23019731980199020002010decided

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 Terry v. Ohio · Morrissey v. Brewer · Coolidge v. New Hampshire · Spinelli v. United States · Jones v. United States

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

  1. “[A] holding that the exclusionary rule does not apply in revocation hearings is compelled by a consideration that although extension of the exclusionary rule to parole and probation revocation hearings might have a desirable deterrent effect upon illegal official conduct, any such incremental deterrence is more than outweighed by the social consequences that would result from imposing such an impediment to blind the court or agency from relevant facts when it must make the delicate decision as to when a convicted person can be allowed to return to and remain in society. The state has an overwhelming interest in being able to return the individual to imprisonment without the burden of a new adversary criminal trial if, in fact, the parolee has failed to abide by the conditions of his parole.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “`diminution of Fourth Amendment protection can only be justified "to the extent actually necessitated by the legitimate demands of the operation of the parole process.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “... The liberty of a parolee enables him to do a wide range of things open to persons who have never been convicted of any crime. The parolee has been released from prison based on an evaluation that he shows reasonable promise of being able to return to society and function as a responsible, self-reliant person. Subject to the conditions of his parole, he can be gainfully employed and is free to be with family and friends and to form the other enduring attachments of normal life. Though the State properly subjects him to any restrictions not applicable to other citizens, his condition is very different from that of confinement in a prison. [Emphasis supplied].”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.