State v. Whitehead’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
14
cited by 14 later decisions
3
states following
January 1992
most recently cited
14 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Rakas v. Illinois · Jones v. United States · United States v. Salvucci · Carpenter v. United States · In Re the Attorney General, Stephan
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"In Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128 , 58 L.Ed.2d 387 , 99 S.Ct. 421 (1978), rehearing denied 439 U.S. 1122 (1979), the court found the standing conferred in Jones because the defendant was ‘legitimately on the premises’ to be too broad. The court stated that the ‘capacity to claim the protection of the Fourth Amendment depends not upon a property right in the invaded place but upon whether the person who claims the protection of the Amendment has a legitimate expectation of privacy in the invaded place.’ p. 143. (Emphasis supplied). “In United States v. Salvucci, 448 U.S. 83 , 65 L.Ed.2d 619 , 100 S.Ct. 2547 (1980), the court specifically rejected the ‘automatic standing’ rule of Jones. As noted above, the rule of Jones conferred ‘automatic standing’ when the element of possession was also an element of the criminal charge. The court in Salvucci approved Rakas , stating that an illegal search can only violate the rights of those who have a ‘legitimate expectation of privacy in the invaded place.’ The basic test to determine whether or not a person present on the premises at the time of a search has standing to challenge the validity of the search is not whether that person ‘had a possessory interest in the items seized, but whether he had an expectation of privacy in the area searched.’ 448 U.S. at 93 . “This court has also recognized that the Fourth Amendment right to protection from unreasonable searches is based upon the individual’s right of privacy (State v. Chiles, 226 ”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.