State v. Westmiller’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[I]nvestigative stops of automobiles and their occupants for suspected violations of law may be upheld if an officer has at least a reasonable suspicion that the motorist has violated the law or probable cause to believe the motorist has done so. State v. Westmiller, 2007 ND 52, ¶ 9 , 730 N.W.2d 134 . In Westmiller , at ¶ 10, we explained the minimum standard to justify a stop: Reasonable suspicion requires more than a mere hunch. State v. Smith, 2005 ND 21, ¶ 15 , 691 N.W.2d 203 . Reasonable suspicion for a stop exists when a reasonable person in the officer’s position would be justified by some objective manifestation to suspect potential unlawful activity. Johnson v. Sprynczynatyk, 2006 ND 137, ¶ 9 , 717 N.W.2d 586 ; Smith , at ¶ 15. The reasonable suspicion standard is objective and does not hinge upon the subjective beliefs or motivations of the arresting officer. State v. Leher, 2002 ND 171, ¶ 11 , 653 N.W.2d 56 . In order to determine whether an investigative stop is valid, we consider the totality of the circumstances and examine the information known to the officer at the time of the stop. Gabel [v. North Dakota Dep’t of Transp.], 2006 ND 178, ¶ 11 , 720 N.W.2d 433 ; State v. Torkelsen, 2006 ND 152, ¶ 13 , 718 N.W.2d 22 . The reasonable suspicion standard does not require an officer to rule out every possible innocent excuse for the behavior in question before stopping a vehicle for investigation. State v. Decoteau, 2004 ND 139, ¶ 14 , 681 N.W.2d 803 .”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Skarsgard · State v. Washington

2. “We will affirm a district court's decision on a motion to suppress if there is sufficient competent evidence fairly capable of supporting the district court's findings, and the decision is not contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence.”

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

3. “Questions of law are fully reviewable on appeal, and whether the findings of fact meet a legal standard is a question of law.”

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