Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 214 Neb. 769 - State v. Arnold

State v. Arnold’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
4
states following
December 1993
most recently cited

20 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Aguilar v. Texas · Spinelli v. United States · State v. Payne · State v. Robish

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

  1. “Gates holds that the elements under the two-pronged test concerning the informant’s veracity, reliability, and basis of knowledge should be understood simply as closely intertwined issues that may usefully illuminate the commonsense, practical question whether there is probable cause to believe that contraband or evidence is located in a particular place. The task of the issuing magistrate is simply to make a practical, commonsense decision whether, given all the circumstances set forth in the affidavit before him, including the veracity and basis of knowledge of persons supplying hearsay information, there is a fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found in a particular place.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Affidavits for search warrants must be tested in a commonsense, realistic fashion. Where some of the underlying circumstances are detailed in the affidavit, where reason for crediting the source of the information is given, and when a magistrate has found probable causé, the court should not invalidate the warrant by interpreting the affidavit in a hypertechnical rather than a commonsense manner.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “An informant selected by the police, who makes a purchase of controlled substances under the personal direction, supervision, and control of a police officer, and informs the officer of what the informant saw and heard at the time of the purchase, is presumptively reliable.”
    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.