2000 Pa. Super. 16 - Commonwealth v. Guillespie’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
10
cited by 10 later decisions
3
states following
March 2019
most recently cited
10 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Adams v. Williams · Berkemer v. McCarty · Sibron v. State of New York Peters · Minnesota v. Dickerson
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a]ny act that indicates an intention to take the person into custody and subjects him to the actual control and will of the person making the arrest.... The test is an objective one, i.e. , viewed in the light of the reasonable impression conveyed to the person subjected to the seizure rather than the strictly subjective view of the officers or the persons being seized.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[A]ny innocuous small object(s) could have been contained within the pill bottles. Second, if the officer had thought that the objects in the pockets were 'immediately apparent’ as contraband, he should not have stopped his search and later decided to resume a more detailed search of Guil-lespie’s pockets once he received evidence of drugs having been discarded by his co-defendant.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“a limited search of an individual's outer clothing in an attempt to discover the presence of weapons which may be used to endanger the safety of police or others.”
1 later decision 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.