133 Md. App. 192 - Turner v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

15 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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “law enforcement officers either did not ask for permission to enter or search, and thus did not make known their objective, or, if they did, their request was met with no response or one that was nonspecific and ambiguous.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Daino · 901 F. Supp. 2d 681 - United States v. Harvey

2. “While waiting on the first floor, the [officers] had additional conversation as to whether or not [defendant] could produce any type of identification. It was at that point that [defendant] mentioned that he thought he had a telephone bill with his name on it upstairs in his third floor apartment. [Defendant] then proceeded to go back up to his apartment with Officer Price following behind him. [Defendant] obviously knew that Officer Price was behind him as they climbed three flights of steps. Once they got to the apartment, [Defendant] opened the door to his apartment and entered. At no time, as they were climbing steps or when they reached the door to the apartment did [Defendant] ever tell Officer Price not to come on back up to the apartment or not to come into the apartment or make any objection whatsoever. There was no evidence that that occurred. So, I find that the consent, it was a consent search ... at no time did [Defendant] object to the officer entering the apartment when he certainly had an opportunity to do so as they climbed the stairs to the apartment. So, I find that there was no violation of [Defendant’s] Fourth Amendment rights....”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 901 F. Supp. 2d 681 - United States v. Harvey

3. “The Fourth Circuit cases finding implied consent fall into three general categories: cases in which there was a specific request by police officers and a nonverbal affirmative response by an individual, cases in which an individual took some affirmative act that directly exposed his or her property to inspection, and a case in which there was a working relationship between police officers and a cooperating individual.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 901 F. Supp. 2d 681 - United States v. Harvey