State v. Setterstrom’s Empirical Analysis
2008
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently August 2020
9 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 Mapp v. Ohio · Wilson v. Porter · 121 Wash. 2d 168 - State v. Collins · State v. Rankin · 116 Wash. 2d 509 - State v. Glover
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“officers may protect themselves when the situation reasonably appears dangerous, but a frisk is a narrow exception to the rule that searches require warrants. The courts must be jealous guardians of the exception in order to protect the rights of citizens.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Xiong“frisk a person for weapons, but only if (1) he justifiably stopped the person before the frisk, (2) he has a reasonable concern of danger, and (3) the frisk's scope is limited to finding weapons.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Xiong“Without probable cause and a warrant, an officer is limited in what he can do. He cannot arrest a suspect; he cannot conduct a broad search.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Garvin
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.