Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 171 W. Va. 676 - State v. Flint

171 W. Va. 676 - State v. Flint’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

67
cited by 67 later decisions
6
states following
June 2009
most recently cited

67 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 67 later decisions — most recently June 2009 · most notably 194 W. Va. 97 - Tennant v. Marion Health Care Foundation, Inc. (1995), 196 W. Va. 588 - Muscatell v. Cline (1996)

67 state decisions

340198319902000decided

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 Chimel v. California · New York v. Belton · United States v. Robinson · Gustafson v. Florida · Industrial National Bank of Rhode Island v. Wingate Corp.

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

  1. “The discretion of the trial court in ruling on the propriety of argument by counsel before the jury will not be interfered with by the appellate court, unless it appears that the rights of the complaining party have been prejudiced, or that manifest injustice resulted therefrom.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““In interstate extradition proceedings, the prisoner is held under the extradition process only until such time as he reaches the jurisdiction of the demanding state, and is thenceforth held under the process issued out of the courts of that state. Consequently, the regularity of extradition proceedings may be attacked only in the asylum state; after an alleged fugitive has been delivered into the jurisdiction of the demanding state, the proceedings may not be challenged.” (Citations omitted.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “An automobile may be stopped for some legitimate state interest. Once the vehicle is lawfully stopped for a legitimate state interest, probable cause may arise to believe the vehicle is carrying weapons, contraband or evidence of the commission of a crime, and, at this point, if exigent circumstances are present, a warrantless search may be made.”
    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.