Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 235 Mont. 115 - State v. Sundberg

State v. Sundberg’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

53
cited by 53 later decisions
3
states following
July 2016
most recently cited

2 district · 51 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 53 later decisions — most recently July 2016 · most notably State v. Reesman (2000), State v. Rinehart (1993)

2 district · 51 state decisions

3501988199020002010decided

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 Illinois v. Gates · Mapp v. Ohio · Aguilar v. Texas · Brinegar v. United States · Spinelli v. United States

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

  1. “`[i]n dealing with probable cause . . ., as the very name implies, we deal with probabilities. These are not technical; they are the factual and practical considerations of everyday life on which reasonable and prudent men, not legal technicians, act.'”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[a]dmissions of crime, like admissions against proprietary interests, carry their own indicia of credibility—sufficient at least to support a finding of probable cause to search”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[PJrobable cause to search is not the same as probable cause to arrest. Probable cause to arrest exists where the facts and circumstances within the officer’s knowledge or of which he has reasonably trustworthy information would warrant a man of ordinary caution in the belief that the arrestee has committed or is committing a crime. But the right to search is not dependent upon the right to arrest. Probable cause to search exists if the man of ordinary caution would be justified in believing that what is sought will be found in the place to be searched and that what is sought, if not contraband or fruits or implements of a crime, will ‘aid in a particular apprehension or conviction.’”
    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.