State v. Chaplin’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 state decisions

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

1. “In reviewing a motion to suppress, we are deferential to the factual determinations and inferences made in the initial determination of probable cause, but we review conclusions of law without deference. Where, as here, the motion is to suppress evidence seized pursuant to a warrant, the initial finding of probable cause by a judicial officer is given great deference. ... Even under this heightened deference with regard to factual determinations and inferences drawn therefrom, however, the ultimate question of whether the factual claims in an affidavit are sufficient to amount to probable cause is still a matter of law appropriate for fresh appellate review. Our review is thus to ensure that the magistrate had a substantial basis for concluding that probable cause existed.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Stuart Cleland

2. “We examine the totality of the circumstances to determine whether there was substantial evidence supporting the warrant, keeping in mind that affidavits must be viewed in a common-sense manner and not be subjected to hypertechnical scrutiny.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Stuart Cleland

3. “Generally, probable cause exists when the affidavit sets forth such information that a judicial officer would reasonably conclude that a crime had been committed and that evidence of the crime will be found in the place to be searched.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Stuart Cleland