133 Or. App. 265 - State v. Lumpkin’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"[T]he officer here gave very clear reasons as to why he was concerned that the object that he felt might have contained a weapon: Despite his repeated instructions to defendant to keep his arms spread out on the trunk of the police car, defendant twice pulled his arms and hands in toward the midsection of his body and out of [the officer's] view—exactly where [the officer] felt the unidentified object. * * * [The officer's] belief was reasonable under the circumstances, and he was justified in removing the pouch." Lumpkin, 133 Or. App. at 270 , 891 P.2d 660 . (Emphasis supplied.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. 142 Or. App. 237 - State v. Blevins

2. “[W]e hold that Article I, section 9, of the Oregon Constitution does not forbid an officer to take reasonable steps to protect himself or others if, during the course of a lawful encounter with a citizen, the officer develops a reasonable suspicion, based upon specific and articulable facts, that the citizen might pose an immediate threat of serious physical injury to the officer or to others then present.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. 142 Or. App. 237 - State v. Blevins

3. “"if the officer has a `reasonable suspicion, based on specific and articulable facts,' that the object [felt during a frisk] contains a dangerous or deadly weapon."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. 142 Or. App. 237 - State v. Blevins