State v. Golotta’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
2 district · 65 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 71 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2021 · most notably 134 S. Ct. 1683 - Prado Navarette v. California (2014), Prado Navarette v. California (2014)
2 district · 65 state decisions — followed in 15 states
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 Illinois v. Gates · Delaware v. Prouse · United States v. Sokolow · Alabama v. White · Kennedy v. Mendoza-Martinez
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 71 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he State stands on firm constitutional ground when it treats the anonymous 9-1-1 caller in the same fashion as it would an identified citizen.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Perhaps most important, here the officer was confronted with a risk of imminent danger to defendant and to the public, a circumstance that allowed the officer less corroboration time than if the tip had alleged that an individual standing passively on the street corner was carrying a concealed weapon. Although unlawfully concealing a weapon poses a public-safety risk, driving a pickup truck erratically on a highway such as Route 206 is a more immediate threat. In such urgent situations, a police officer need not wait for corroboration that might be fatal to an innocent member of the public or to the driver himself. [ Id. at 226 , [ 837 A. 2d 359 ].]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“[o]ur scope of review ... is limited to whether the trial court’s decision is supported by the record as it existed at the time of trial”); State v. Golotta, 178 N.J. 205, 211-12 , 837 A.2d 359 (2003) (stating ”[i]t would be inconsistent with appellate practice for us to accept the proffered information here, especially in view of the fact that the State had ample opportunity two years ago to present it at the proper forum, namely, at the original suppression hearing”
1 later decision 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.