State v. Suazo’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 55 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably 163 Ill. 2d 302 - People v. James (1994), State v. Frankel (2004)
4 federal appellate · 55 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 Terry v. Ohio · Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · Brinegar v. United States · United States v. Matlock · Illinois v. Rodriguez
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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the preferred procedure for law-enforcement officers seeking consent to search one of several pieces of luggage in a car with more than one occupant is for the officers to determine which occupant owns each item of luggage, so that the officers’ reliance on consent to search may be justifiable. Although adherence to that procedure is not determinative of the validity of a search, defendant’s acknowledg merit that he owned the red bag impelled [the trooper] either to seek defendant’s consent or to make further inquiry before opening the bag. [ Id at 322, 627 A.2d 1074 (emphasis added).]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“if a law-enforcement officer at the time of the search erroneously, but reasonably, believed that a third party possessed common authority over the property to be searched, a warrantless search based on that third party's consent is permissible under the Fourth Amendment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[A] driver's apparent authority to consent to a search of the car does not include the authority to permit a search of the personal belongings of other passengers.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.