State v. Edmonds’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

71 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 71 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “1) the officer had ‘an objectively reasonable basis to believe that an emergency requires that he provide immediate assistance to protect or preserve life, or to prevent serious injur/ and 2) there was a ‘reasonable nexus between the emergency and the area or places to be searched.’ [Ibid, (quoting Frankel, supra, 179 N.J. at 600 , 847 A.2d 561 ).]”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. State v. Evan Reece (073284) · State v. Fede

2. “recognizes that police officers provide a wide range of social services outside of their traditional law enforcement and criminal investigatory roles. These social-welfare activities include, among other things, protecting the vulnerable from harm and preserving property. In performing these tasks, typically, there is not time to acquire a warrant when emergent circumstances arise and an immediate search is required to preserve life or property. This narrow exception to the warrant requirement has been applied to such circumstances as allowing the police to conduct a warrantless search of a car to locate a gun that was missing from a police officer, to perform a “welfare check” of a vehicle that was parked in an area known for suicides and whose last authorized driver was listed as a missing person, and to set foot in an apartment to ascertain the welfare of a child who was home from school, with no apparent excuse, in a residence that had been the site of an alleged sexual assault earlier that day. [Id. at 141, 47 A.3d 737 (internal citations omitted).]”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. State v. Keaton

3. “the public safety officer must have an objectively reasonable basis to believe that an emergency requires that he provide immediate assistance to protect or preserve life, or prevent serious injury; his primary motivation for entry into the home must be to render assistance, not to find and seize evidence; and there must be a reasonable nexus between the emergency and the area or places to be searched. [Ibid.]”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Evan Reece (073284)