State v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
57
cited by 57 later decisions
4
cited 4 times by the Supreme Court
4
states following
May 2015
most recently cited
53 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Illinois v. Wardlow · Miller v. United States · Wilson v. Arkansas · Richards v. Wisconsin
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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“First, to justify a no-knock warrant provision, a police officer must have a reasonable, particularized suspicion that a no-knock entry is required to prevent the destruction of evidence, to protect the officer's safety, or to effectuate the arrest or seizure of evidence. Second, the police officer must articulate the reasons for that suspicion and may base those reasons on the totality of the circumstances with which he or she is faced. Third, although the officer's assessment of the circumstances may be based on his or her experience and knowledge, the officer must articulate a minimal level of objective justification to support the no-knock entry, meaning it may not be based on a mere hunch. [ Id. at 619 , 775 A. 2d 1273 .]”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[i]n order to justify a `no-knock' entry, the police must have a reasonable suspicion that knocking and announcing their presence, under the particular circumstances, would be dangerous or futile, or that it would inhibit the effective investigation of the crime by, for example, allowing the destruction of evidence.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he method of an officer's entry into a dwelling `is an element of the reasonableness inquiry under the Fourth Amendment.'”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.