State v. Olmsted’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently October 2017
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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Barker v. Wingo · Carbon County v. Union Reserve Coal Co., Inc. · State v. Gopher · State v. Weeks
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.
“[i]n order to obtain or verify an account of the person’s presence or conduct or to determine whether to arrest the person, a peace officer may stop any person or vehicle that is observed in circumstances that create a particularized suspicion that the person or occupant of the vehicle has committed, is committing, or is about to commit an offense.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Kriesel“The fourth factor of the Barker test, prejudice to the defendant, must be demonstrated by the defendant before there is a speedy trial violation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Ariegwe“[W]hen a mistrial is declared, the speedy trial clock is reset and begins to run from the date of the mistrial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Ariegwe
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.