236 Ga. App. 3 - Burns v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““In (State v. Golden), 171 Ga. App. 27 ( 318 SE2d 693 ) (1984) and Evans v. State, 190 Ga. App. 856 ( 380 SE2d 332 ) (1989), we addressed several factors in determining whether the roadblocks which were there in issue were reasonable and constitutional. However, neither Evans nor Golden establishes absolute criteria which must be satisfied before a roadblock is legitimate. Indeed, in Evans , this Court looked at the totality of the circumstances surrounding the roadblock to decide whether the factors in Golden were satisfied. . . . Our Supreme Court, relying on Golden, has held that where the decision to implement the roadblock was made by supervisory personnel rather than the officers in the field; all vehicles are stopped as opposed to random vehicle stops; the delay to motorists is minimal; the roadblock operation is well identified as a police checkpoint, and the screening officer’s training and experience [are] sufficient ... , a roadblock is satisfactory and is within the constitutional confines of a routine motorist roadblock. LaFontaine v. State, 269 Ga. 251, 253 ( 497 SE2d 367 ) (1998).” (Punctuation omitted.) Heimlich v. State, 231 Ga. App. 662, 663-664 ( 500 SE2d 388 ) (1998). See also Brent v. State, 270 Ga. 160 ( 570 SE2d 14 ) (1998).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 243 Ga. App. 337 - State v. Ruiz

2. “When reviewing a trial court’s decision on a motion to suppress, this court’s responsibility is to ensure that there was a substantial basis for the decision. The evidence is construed most favorably to uphold the findings and judgment, and the trial court’s findings on disputed facts and credibility are adopted unless they are clearly erroneous. Further, since the trial court sits as the trier of fact, its findings are analogous to a jury verdict and will not be disturbed if there is any evidence to support them.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 243 Ga. App. 337 - State v. Ruiz