Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 161 Vt. 236 - State v. Rogers

State v. Rogers’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
4
states following
October 2021
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently October 2021 · most notably State v. Read (1996), State v. Bryant (2008)

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 28 state decisions

1401993200020102020decided

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 Katz v. United States · Oliver v. United States · United States v. Dunn · Ginsburg v. Stern · State v. Badger

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

  1. “Kirchojfholds that the State must have a warrant to enter land when it is apparent to a reasonable person that the owner or occupant intends to exclude the public. This standard is intended to define instances where a landowner’s expectation of privacy in an area is reasonable or legitimate. . . . In this case, there were no barriers to indicate defendant’s intent to exclude the public. Where land is left unimproved and unbounded, the owner or occupant has not taken sufficient steps to exclude the public to trigger the protection of Chapter I, Article 11 of the Vermont Constitution.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Article 11 does not protect areas willingly exposed to the public.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.