12 Wash. App. 274 - State v. Proctor’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

20 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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““[I]n police work, circumstances sometimes develop in which an intermediate response is appropriate. If a police officer has a ‘well-founded suspicion not amounting to probable cause,’ that a person has, is, or is about to commit a crime, that person may be detained for investigatory purposes without an arrest. . . . The tern- porary detention may continue while the officer questions other persons present or radios police headquarters to check the information gained. ... A noting of the serial numbers on the calculators was such an intermediate response.” 12 Wash. App. at 277 , 529 P.2d at 474 . (Citations omitted.)”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 20 Wash. App. 535 - State v. Legas · 116 Wis. 2d 443 - State v. Noll

2. “In other words, police who are rightfully upon a citizen's property for a limited purpose may not rummage about in the hope or expectation that incriminating evidence or contraband will turn up. But that is not this case. The information which the police had about Proctor, coupled with the incongruity of the items seen in the business office, gave the officer probable cause to believe that he was looking at stolen property. It was reasonable for him to note the serial numbers.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 13 Wash. App. 829 - State v. Keefe · 20 Wash. App. 462 - State v. Nichols