State v. Spaulding’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

26 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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “First, as long as there are objective, specific and articulable facts from which an experienced officer would suspect that a citizen is in need of help or is in peril, then that officer has the right to stop and investigate. Second, if the citizen is in need of aid, then the officer may take appropriate action to render assistance or mitigate the peril. Third, once, however, the officer is assured that the citizen is not in peril or is no longer in need of assistance or that the peril has been mitigated, then any actions beyond that constitute a seizure implicating not only the protections provided by the Fourth Amendment, but more importantly, those greater guarantees afforded under Article II, Sections 10 and 11 of the Montana Constitution as interpreted in this Court’s decisions.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Anders

2. “[e]ach community caretaker case turns on its discrete facts. That a particular case is not, factually, a cookie-cutter copy of another simply proves this point.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Grmoljez

3. “the absence of such circumstances, while relevant, does not negate the objective, specific, and articulable facts which did exist ....”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Grmoljez