157 Ind. App. 198 - Bryant v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
40 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently September 2008 · most notably 168 Ind. App. 394 - Payne v. State (1976), 167 Ind. App. 185 - Collett v. State (1975)
40 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 · Carroll v. United States · Chimel v. California · Coolidge v. New Hampshire · Adams v. Williams
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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"When a law enforcement officer in a distinctive uniform, or in plain clothes after having identified himself as a law enforcement officer reasonably infers, from the observation of unusual conduct under the circumstances and in light of his experience, that criminal activity has been, is being, or is about to be committed by any person, observed in a public place said officer may stop such person for a reasonable period of time and may make reasonable inquiries concerning the name and address of such person and an explanation of his action. Said stopping and inquiry shall be limited to those matters under the enforcement jurisdiction of the particular officer and when conducted within the limits specified herein shall not constitute official custody or arrest and shall not constitute grounds for civil liability for false arrest or false imprisonment."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Williams v. State““ ‘The Fourth Amendment does not require a policeman who lacks the precise level of information necessary for probable cause to arrest to simply shrug his shoulders and allow a crime to occur or a criminal to escape. On the contrary, Terry [ 392 U.S. 1 , 88 S.Ct. 1868 , 20 L.E.2d 889 ] recognizes that it may be the essence of good police work to adopt an intermediate response. ... A brief stop of a suspicious individual, in order to determine his identity or to maintain the status quo momentarily while obtaining more information, may be most reasonable in light of the facts known to the officer at the time. . . .’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“"The important point is not the nomenclature used to describe the activity, i.e., `stop and frisk', or "investigatory detention', or `arrest', etc. The important point is that the Fourth Amendment applies whenever a person is `seized'. To be lawful, any `search and seizure' must fall within the constitutional confines of reasonableness... ."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Williams v. State
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.