Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 198 CONN 348 - State v. Brown

State v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

85
cited by 85 later decisions
4
states following
December 2016
most recently cited

2 district · 82 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 85 later decisions — most recently December 2016 · most notably State v. Mooney (1991), State v. Hill (1996)

2 district · 82 state decisions

3901986199020002010decided

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 Katz v. United States · Carroll v. United States · Coolidge v. New Hampshire · Rakas v. Illinois · Johnson v. United States

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

  1. “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
    e.g. 1999 Conn. Super. Ct. 12084 - State v. Schofield, No. Cr 98-468691 (Aug. 16, 1999)
  2. “The people shall be secure in their persons, houses, papers and possessions from unreasonable searches and seizures; and no warrant to search any place, or to seize any person or things, shall issue without describing them as nearly as may be, nor without probable cause supported by oath or affirmation.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
    e.g. 1999 Conn. Super. Ct. 12084 - State v. Schofield, No. Cr 98-468691 (Aug. 16, 1999)
  3. “Objects and activities located within a home [that are] visible to others in areas expressly or impliedly open to the public are not accorded fourth amendment protection because any privacy expectation in CT Page 10663 such exposed areas would be unreasonable.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
    e.g. 2000 Conn. Super. Ct. 10656 - State v. Kelly, No. Cv-99-0070159-S (Aug. 25, 2000)

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.