State v. Robertson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The two aspects of reliability of the information and the provision of underlying circumstances as to how the informant came by his information to demonstrate its probability or credibility are lacking. Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 , 84 S.Ct. 1509 , 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964). This information, perhaps, may have been sufficient in the affidavit had it established that the witnesses relied upon were eyewitnesses. As we have previously held, an eyewitness to an act meets both aspects of Aguilar: ‘Also, the affidavit recites the fact that the informant “saw” the narcotics in the defendant’s possession. In State v. Ramos, 11 Ariz. App. 196 , 463 P.2d 91 (1969), we held that when an affidavit indicates that the informant was an eyewitness to the actual crime, the two-pronged test for evaluating the existence of probable cause is met. See also McCreary v. Sigler, 406 F.2d 1264 (8th Cir. 1969). In other words, reliability of the informant is thereby demonstrated plus the “underlying circumstances” requisite for evaluation of the informant’s “tip.” We therefore reject the defendant’s challenge to the sufficiency of the affidavit.’ State v. White, 13 Ariz.App. 265 at 266-267 , 475 P.2d 750 at 751-752 .” 526 P.2d at 745 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 22 Ariz. App. 425 - State v. O'BRIEN