2005 UT App 409 - State v. Duran’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 state decisions

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

1. “we review 'the trial court's conclusions of law based on such facts under a correctness standard, according no deference to the trial court's legal conclusions.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2013 UT App 90 - State v. Stevens · 2007 UT App 228 - State v. Garcia

2. “The officers were faced with an ambiguous situation concerning the trailer. Although it was owned by Mother, it was rented to Horvath. Despite that ambiguity, the officers made no further inquiry and proceeded with the warrantless [consent] search. The search was not lawful ....”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Harding

3. “If the facts known to the officers would not cause a person of reasonable caution to conclude that the consenting party had authority over the premises, `then warrantless entry without further inquiry is unlawful unless authority actually exists'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Harding