State v. Albaugh’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently June 2011
4 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 Brown v. Texas · United States v. Martinez-Fuerte · Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz · State v. Tourtillott · City of Bismarck v. Uhden
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A Fourth Amendment “seizure” occurs when a vehicle is stopped by police at a checkpoint. Michigan Dep’t of State Police v. Sitz, 496 U.S. 444, 450 [ 110 S.Ct. 2481 , 110 L.Ed.2d 412 ] (1990); State v. Everson, 474 N.W.2d 695, 698 (N.D.1991); State v. Wetzel, 456 N.W.2d 115, 117-118 (N.D.1990). However, individualized reasonable suspicion is not required for checkpoint stops. United States v. Martinez-Fuerte, 428 U.S. 543, 561-562 [ 96 S.Ct. 3074 , 49 L.Ed.2d 1116 ] (1976). Checkpoint stops nevertheless present important concerns under the Fourth Amendment and Section 8, Article I of the North Dakota Constitution. See Sitz, 496 U.S. at 450 [ 110 S.Ct. 2481 ]; Everson, 474 N.W.2d at 698-699 . The basic question is whether the seizure is reasonable.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Hahne
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.