Dalton v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1952
Citation profile
50 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently December 1996 · most notably People v. Carter (1957), Pirtle v. State (1975)
50 state decisions — followed in 11 states
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Boyd v. United States · Weeks v. United States · Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States · Amos v. United States · Wallace v. State
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable search, or seizure, shall not be violated; and no warrant shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the person or thing to be seized.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Lindsey v. State · State v. Buxton““ . . . Evidence obtained as a result of an unreasonable search and seizure in violation of the constitutional prohibition, ‘whether it be the instruments used to commit the crime, or oral evidence of what was found or seen in such unlawful search — is incompetent against the accused, and a conviction based thereon ought to be reversed. Boyd v. United States (1885), 116 U. S. 616 , 6 Sup. Ct. 524, 29 L. Ed. 746 ; Weeks v. United States (1913), 232 U. S. 383 , 34 Sup. Ct. 341, 58 L. Ed. 652 , L. R. A. 1915B 834, Ann. Cas. 1915C 1177; Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States (1919), 251 U. S. 385 , 40 Sup. Ct. 182, 64 L. Ed. 319 .’ Flum v. State (1923), 193 Ind. 585, 590 , 141 N. E. 353 , supra. See also Dearing v. State (1948), 226 Ind. 273 , 79 N. E. 2d 535 .””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Buxton
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.