State v. Boehm’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “A trial court's findings of fact in preliminary proceedings of a criminal case will not be reversed if, after the conflicts in the testimony are resolved in favor of affirmance, there is sufficient competent evidence fairly capable of supporting the trial court's findings, and the decision is not contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence. We do not conduct a de novo review. We evaluate the evidence presented to see, based on the standard of review, if it supports the findings of fact. State v. Whitman , 2013 ND 183 , ¶ 20, 838 N.W.2d 401 . "Questions of law are fully reviewable on appeal, and whether a finding of fact meets a legal standard is a question of law." State v. Graf , 2006 ND 196 , ¶ 7, 721 N.W.2d 381 .”

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

2. “An officer has “reasonable suspicion” to stop a motor vehicle if the officer can point to “some objective manifestation that the person stopped is, or is about to be, engaged in criminal activity.” Probable cause to arrest, however, requires more: it exists when “the facts and circumstances within a police officer’s knowledge and of which he had reasonable trustworthy information are sufficient to warrant a person of reasonable caution to believe that an offense has been or is being committed.” When determining whether probable cause exists to arrest, however, the officer need not possess knowledge or facts sufficient to establish guilt.”

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