State v. Lockett’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
49 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently April 2015 · most notably State v. Grissom (1992), State v. Francis (2006)
49 state decisions
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 Franks v. Delaware · Southern Railway Co. v. North Carolina · Patterson v. Medberry · State v. Marks · State v. Jacques
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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A] deliberate omission is often equal to an actual misstatement. Thus, the [ State v.] Jacques [ 225 Kan. 38 , 587 P.2d 861 (1978)] and Franks rules can easily apply to a case where a person claims authorities deliberately omitted material information from a search warrant.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ ‘[b]its and pieces of information are fitted together until a picture is formed which leads a reasonably prudent person to believe a crime has been or is being committed and that evidence of the crime may be found on a particular person or in a place or means of conveyance.’ [Citation omitted.]” State v. Lockett, 232 Kan. 317, 320 , 654 P.2d 433 (1982).”
1 later decision 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.