Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 126 N.M. 569 - State v. Taylor

State v. Taylor’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

76
cited by 76 later decisions
4
states following
October 2015
most recently cited

76 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 76 later decisions — most recently October 2015 · most notably State v. JAVIER M. (2001), State v. Vandenberg (2003)

76 state decisions

600199820002010decided

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 · Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · Florida v. Royer · Brown v. Illinois · United States v. Guzman

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

  1. “In order for evidence obtained after an illegality, but with the voluntary consent of the defendant, to be admissible, there must be a break in the causal chain from the illegality to the search. The proper question in evaluating whether a consent was tainted by prior illegality is whether there was sufficient attenuation between the illegality and the consent to search. In deciding whether the consent is sufficiently attenuated from the Fourth Amendment violation, we consider the temporal proximity of the illegal act and the consent, the presence or absence of intervening circumstances, and the purpose and flagrancy of the official misconduct.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “both voluntary and purged of all taint under a Fourth Amendment challenge”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “An investigatory stop is based on reasonable suspicion if the officer is aware of specific articulable facts, together with rational inferences from those facts, that, when judged objectively, would lead a reasonable person to believe criminal activity occurred or was occurring.”
    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.