Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 122 Wash. 2d 73 - State v. Olivas

122 Wash. 2d 73 - State v. Olivas’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

102
cited by 102 later decisions
16
states following
January 2022
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 2 district · 83 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 102 later decisions — most recently January 2022 · most notably State v. Brown (1997), 126 Wash. 2d 136 - State v. Brett (1995)

12 federal appellate · 2 district · 83 state decisions — followed in 16 states

6101993200020102020decided

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

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Boykin v. Alabama · Wolff v. McDonnell · Bell v. Wolfish · Chimel 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 102 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “special need, beyond the normal need for law enforcement,”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “mere chance” that he might commit a crime in the future and that the stored data might provide evidence which might identify him. Accordingly, because probable cause or individualized suspicion would be lacking relative to some future offense, the statute violates defendant’s right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. The fourth amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees that”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “doctrine has not been fully elaborated by the Supreme Court, Justice Utter opined that it is unclear whether courts are to balance the government's need' to conduct a search against an individual’s privacy interest, or to balance the government’s need to conduct the search without a watrant against an individual’s privacy interest. See id at 1090. If”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.