213 So. 2d 614 - Sessions v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"In its brief in the present appeal the State distinguishes the Preston case from the case at bar in that in Preston the search was made for evidence of a crime which the police did not yet know the defendants had committed, and so the search was purely exploratory in nature while in the instant case the sergeant had reasonable grounds to believe that a serious felony — robbery — had been committed by the defendants, and searched the automobile as an incident to the arrest. "The State further points out in its brief that the U.S. Supreme Court in the later case of Cooper v. State of California, 386 U.S. 58 , 87 S.Ct. 788 , 17 L.Ed.2d 730 (1967), thus clarified its holding in the Preston case, supra: `We made it clear in Preston that whether a search and seizure is unreasonable within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment depends upon the facts and circumstances of each case and pointed out, in particular, that searches of cars that are constantly movable may make the search of a car without a warrant a reasonable one although the result might be the opposite in a search of a home, a store, or other fixed piece of property.' "Applying the rule, as just clarified in the Cooper case, to the facts and circumstances of the case at bar, we think that the search was a reasonable one and not in violation of constitutional safeguards, and we hold that the trial court properly admitted into evidence, and permitted testimony concerning, the items found by the police in the defendants' aut”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 300 So. 2d 743 - Mahoney v. State