180 N.J. Super. 452 - State v. Wilcox’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently December 2006
15 state decisions
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 Terry v. Ohio · Bell v. Wolfish · Adams v. Williams · Michigan v. Summers · State v. De Simone
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is important to note that ... Adams [v. Williams, 407 U.S. at 143 , 92 S.Ct. at 1921 , 32 L.Ed.2d at 612 [1972], does not limit] the authority of a police officer acting with reasonable suspicion to simply stopping the suspected individual temporarily. In Adams , the court stated that an officer may stop a person under such circumstances "in order to determine his identity... ." Indeed, unless the officer is entitled to at least ascertain the identity of the suspect, the right to stop him can serve no useful purpose at all. The suspect need only wait for what may be presumed to be a reasonable time, and then proceed on his way. Ignorant of even the person's name, the officer must either attempt to follow the suspect in the hope that he will discover some clue as to his identity, or surrender the potential lead and continue his investigation along other lines. Particularly where the officer is confronted with a number of potential suspects, limiting his options in this manner could have a perplexing effect on law enforcement efforts. * * * * * * To accept defendant's contention that the officer can stop the suspect and request identification, but that the suspect can turn right around and refuse to provide it, would reduce the authority of the officer granted by [the statute] and recognized by the United States Supreme Court in Adams ... to identify a person lawfully stopped by him to a mere fiction. Unless the officer is given some recourse in the event his request for ide”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“search of [Wilcox]'s person was not an unreasonable intrusion in view of the evident need to establish [the] defendant's identity in the investigation of a suspected crime or crimes,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[n]o United States Supreme Court opinion [was] squarely in point,”
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.