Seabolt v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently December 2022 · most notably 2010 OK CR 8 - Marshall v. State (2010), Johnson v. State (2012)
26 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2412
Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Illinois v. Gates · Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · Florida v. Royer · Ornelas v. United States
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A traffic stop is a seizure under the Fourth Amendment. McGaughey v. State , 2001 OK CR 33, ¶ 24 , 37 P.3d 130, 136 . The scope and duration of such a seizure must be related to the stop and must last no longer than is necessary to effectuate the stop's purpose. Florida v. Royer , 460 U.S. 491, 500 , 103 S. Ct. 1319, 1325 , 75 L. Ed. 2d 229 (1983); Terry v. Ohio , 392 U.S. 1, 20 , 88 S. Ct. 1868, 1879 , 20 L. Ed. 2d 889 (1968); McGaughey , 2001 OK CR 33 , ¶¶ 24 and 27, 37 P.3d at 136-37 . If the length of the investigative detention goes beyond the time necessary to reasonably effectuate the reason for the stop, the Fourth Amendment requires reasonable suspicion that the person stopped has committed, is committing or is about to commit a crime.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. STATE v. STRAWN · Johnson v. State“If the length of the investigative detention goes beyond the time necessary to reasonably effectuate the reason for the stop, the Fourth Amendment requires reasonable suspicion that the person stopped has committed, is committing or is about to commit a crime.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. STATE v. MORGAN · FUENTES v. STATE“I believe the problem has evolved due to appellate courts not being willing to exercise self-discipline and merely adjudicate the issues before them. Using this guise is a method of reaching out and touching issues either not presented or already decided in order to render a decision the court feels is needed. I realize this issue boils down to judicial philosophy and the limitations on judicial power. However, if we are to have a judicial system where judges and juries are tasked with the responsibility to make decisions on the facts of a case then appellate courts should hon- or those decisions. To do otherwise leaves the law unsettled and encourages repeated appeals hoping the biorhythmic chart for the court will allow success on a particular day.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Logan v. State
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.