Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2000 ND 154 - State v. Gregg

State v. Gregg’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

50
cited by 50 later decisions
2
states following
February 2026
most recently cited

50 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently February 2026 · most notably State v. Mitzel (2004), State v. Smith (2005)

50 state decisions

260200020102020decided

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 Wong Sun v. United States · Katz v. United States · Payton v. New York · Whren v. United States · New York v. Belton

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

  1. “[I]f the search of an automobile without warrant is made upon probable cause, based upon a reasonable belief arising out of the circumstances known to the officer — that the automobile contains articles which are subject to seizure — the search is valid.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"When reviewing a district court's ruling on a motion to suppress, we defer to the district court's findings of fact and resolve conflicts in testimony in favor of affirmance. City of Grand Forks v. Zejdlik, 551 N.W.2d 772, 774 (N.D.1996) (citing City of Grand Forks v. Egley, 542 N.W.2d 104 (N.D.1996)). We affirm the district court's decision unless we conclude there is insufficient competent evidence to support the decision, or unless the decision goes against the manifest weight of the evidence. City of Fargo v. Thompson, 520 N.W.2d 578, 581 (N.D. 1994). "`Although the underlying factual disputes are findings of fact, whether the findings meet a legal standard, in this instance a reasonable and articulable suspicion, is a question of law.' Zejdlik, 551 N.W.2d at 774 (citations omitted). Questions of law are fully reviewable. Id. (citing State v. Glaesman, 545 N.W.2d 178 (N.D.1996)). The ultimate conclusion of whether the facts support a reasonable and articulable suspicion is fully reviewable on appeal. State v. Hawley, 540 N.W.2d 390, 392 (N.D. 1995)."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “When reviewing a district court’s ruling on a motion to suppress, we defer to the district court’s findings of fact and resolve conflicts in testimony in favor of affirmance. We affirm the district court’s decision unless we conclude there is .insufficient competent evidepce to support the decision, or unless, the decision goes against the manifest weight of the evidence.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.