Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 219 SW3D 216 - Hallum v. Commonwealth

Hallum v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

2007

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
January 2017
most recently cited

6 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · Mincey v. Arizona · Steagald v. United States · Wyman v. James · Grange Mutual Insurance Co. v. Trude

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

  1. “An appellate court’s standard of review of the trial court’s decision on a motion to suppress requires that we first determine whether the trial court’s findings of fact are supported by substantial evidence. If they are, then they are conclusive. Based on those findings of fact, we must then conduct a de novo review of the trial court’s application of the law to those facts to determine whether its decision is correct as a matter of law.”
    2 later decisions 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.