State v. Guzman’s Empirical Analysis
2008
Citation profile
26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently March 2020 · most notably State v. Weisler, State v. King (2011), State v. Senna (2013)
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
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · State v. Badger · United States v. Humphries · State v. Sprague · 224 Wis. 2d 201 - State v. Secrist
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.
“See 2013, No. 169 (Adj. Sess.), § 1. This fact has no impact on our analysis. 21 Neither Trooper Hatch in his application for a search warrant, nor the State in its statement of undisputed facts, indicated that the trooper observed redness in plaintiff's eyes following the stop. 22 In Guzman , we quoted a Massachusetts court for the proposition that most other courts considering the question of when the odor of marijuana is sufficient to support probable cause”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“given the odor of marijuana from the car, followed by the stronger odor of marijuana that [the officer] detected coming from defendant's person-the only individual present, combined with the officer's other observations of defendant's suspicious conduct.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“that the odor of marijuana, detected by a trained and experienced police officer, can provide a reasonable basis to believe that marijuana is present,”
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.