Ex Parte Green’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides, in pertinent part, that '[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation.' Thus, '[a] search warrant may only be issued upon a showing of probable cause that evidence or instrumentalities of a crime or contraband will be found in the place to be searched.' United States v. Gettel , 474 F.3d 1081 , 1086 (8th Cir.2007)."”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Bolden v. State · 246 So. 3d 1032 - Kelley v. State

2. “`A probable cause determination is made after considering the totality of the circumstances.' Gettel , 474 F.3d at 1086. To pass constitutional muster, `the facts must be sufficient to justify a conclusion that the property which is the object of the search is probably on the premises to be searched at the time the warrant is issued. ' United States v. Greany, 929 F.2d 523, 524-25 (9th Cir. 1991) (emphasis added). Thus, `[t]he police will . . . encounter problems of”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Bolden v. State · 31 So. 3d 728 - CRF v. State

3. ““ ‘[T]he only possible way to justify the admission of the evidence seized pursuant to the search warrant in this case would be as a “good faith” exception to the exclusionary rule as enunciated in United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 , 104 S.Ct. 3405 , 82 L.Ed.2d 677 (1984). In Leon , “the Supreme Court held that evidence obtained pursuant to a facially-valid search warrant, later found to be invalid is inadmissible if the executing officers acted in good faith and in objectively reasonable reliance on the warrant.” United States v. Hove, 848 F.2d 137, 139 (9th Cir.1988). However, the Leon Court specifically noted four circumstances when it cannot be asserted that the officer is acting in “good” faith because “the officer will have no reasonable grounds for believing that the warrant was properly issued.” Leon, 468 U.S. at 923 . One of these circumstances is when an officer relies “on a warrant based on an affidavit 'so lacking in indicia of probable cause as to render official belief in its existence entirely unreasonable.’ ” In its discussion of this circumstance, the Supreme Court stated that ‘"Sufficient information must be presented to the magistrate to allow that official to determine probable cause; his action cannot be a mere ratification of the bare conclusion of others.’” Leon, 468 U.S. at 915 (quoting Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 , 103 S.Ct. 2317 , 76 L.Ed.2d 527 (1983)). [[Image here]] “ ‘ “Leon does not extend, however, to allow the consideration of facts know”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Lane v. State