State v. Fields’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 40 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently March 2026 · most notably State v. Duran (2005), State v. Haibeck (2004)
1 federal appellate · 40 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 Terry v. Ohio · Wong Sun v. United States · United States v. Mendenhall · Whren v. United States · Illinois v. Wardlow
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Requesting the driver’s license and registration, requesting that the driver step out of the vehicle, requesting that the driver wait in the patrol car, conducting computer inquiries to determine the validity of the license and registration, conducting computer searches to investigate the driver’s criminal history and to determine if the driver has outstanding warrants, and making inquiries as to the motorist’s destination and purpose.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Phelps · State v. Walker“[T]his Court looks at the totality of the circumstances, applies an objective standard, and takes into account the inferences and deductions that an investigating officer would make that may elude a layperson. The question is whether a reasonable person in the officer's position would be justified by some objective manifestation to suspect the defendant was, or was about to be, engaged in unlawful activity.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Vetter · State v. Deviley“The trial court's disposition of a motion to suppress will be affirmed unless, after resolving conflicting evidence in favor of affirmance, there is insufficient competent evidence fairly capable of supporting the trial court's findings or the decision is contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Olson · State v. Aguilar
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.