119 Wash. 2d 538 - State v. Perrone’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 92 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 95 later decisions — most recently February 2025 · most notably State v. Stenson (1997), 121 Wash. 2d 22 - State v. Riley (1993)
3 federal appellate · 92 state decisions
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 United States v. Leon · Coolidge v. New Hampshire · United States v. Ventresca · Carnegie v. United States · Miller v. California
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 95 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Scherf · State v. Askham“To satisfy the particularity requirement, the warrant must be sufficiently definite to allow the searching officer to identify the objects sought with reasonable certainty. The degree of required specificity turns on the circumstances and the type of items involved. A description is valid if it is as specific as the circumstances and the nature of the activity, or crime, under investigation permits.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Vance · State v. Hosier“[T]he problem [posed by the general warrant] is not that of intrusion per se, but of a general, exploratory rummaging in a person's belongings.... [The Fourth Amendment addresses the problem] by requiring a `particular description' of the things to be seized.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Stenson · State v. Askham
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.