Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 165 W. Va. 266 - State v. Stone

165 W. Va. 266 - State v. Stone’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

84
cited by 84 later decisions
2
states following
May 2013
most recently cited

84 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 84 later decisions — most recently May 2013 · most notably 167 W. Va. 540 - State v. Peacher (1981), 171 W. Va. 342 - State v. Richey (1982)

84 state decisions

6201980199020002010decided

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 Wong Sun v. United States · Mapp v. Ohio · Coolidge v. New Hampshire · Weeks v. United States · Sedillo v. United States

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

  1. “(1) the police must observe the evidence in plain sight without benefit of a search (without invading one’s reasonable expectation of privacy), (2) the police must have a legal right to be where they are when they make the plain sight observation and, (3) the police must have probable cause to believe that the evidence seen constitutes contraband or fruits, instrumentalities or evidence of crime.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “To constitute probable cause for the issuance of a search warrant, the affiant must set forth facts indicating the existence of criminal activities which would justify a search and further, if there is an unnamed informant, sufficient facts must be set forth demonstrating that the information obtained from the unnamed informant is reliable.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “(1) The police must observe the evidence in plain sight without the benefit of search, [i.e., without invading one’s reasonable expectation of privacy]; (2) The police must have a legal right to be where they are when they make the plain sight observation; and (3) The police must have probable cause to believe the evidence seen constitutes contraband or fruits, instrumentalities or evidence of a crime.”
    3 later decisions 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.