State v. Barker’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

38 state decisions

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

1. “The Aguilar/Spinelli test is designed to ensure that the court, rather than the police, make the determination that probable cause, based on reliable information, is present. Thus, the first prong of the test requires that the affidavit include the factual basis for any conclusions drawn by the informant to enable the court to perform an independent analysis of the facts and conclusions. The second prong requires that facts be presented to the court to show either that the informant is inherently credible or that the information from the informant is reliable on this particular occasion. These requirements are often referred to as the basis of knowledge and veracity (or credibility) tests.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Vest · State v. Vest

2. “contain any recitation of the surrounding circumstances of the informant’s admissions, which would serve to show why they were trustworthy. For instance, it does not contain any specific or detailed facts surrounding the informant’s admissions ... [and] the informant is not named. See 1 [Wayne R.] LaFave, [Search and Seizure ] § 3.3(c) at 647 [ (2d ed.1987) ] (if informant’s name is not disclosed, this makes it much more likely that he is a “protected police stool-pigeon”); [State v.] Mosley, 412 So.2d [527,] 530 [ (La.1982) ] (disclosure of informant’s identity can tend to establish a presumption of inherent credibility).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. In Re Shon Daniel K.