State v. Staten’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
50 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently November 2023 · most notably State v. Coleman (1992), State v. Twohig (1991)
50 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 Terry v. Ohio · Wong Sun v. United States · Chimel v. California · Florida v. Royer · United States v. Sokolow
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.
“[I]f there is a lawful arrest, police have authority, without a search warrant, to conduct a full search of the person arrested and... such search is reasonable under the fourth amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Further, a police officer’s search is not limited to searching the arrested person for weapons only; the officer may search for and seize any evidence on the arrestee’s person, even if such evidence is unrelated to the crime for which the arrest was made, in order to prevent concealment or destruction of evidence.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Thomas · State v. Twohig““[Pjolice can constitutionally stop and briefly detain a person for investigative purposes if the police have a reasonable suspicion, supported by articulable facts, that criminal activity exists, even if probable cause is lacking under the fourth amendment.” State v. Staten, 238 Neb. 13, 18 , 469 N.W.2d 112, 116 (1991). Accord, State v. Thomas, 240 Neb. 545 , 483 N.W.2d 527 (1992); State v. Coleman, 239 Neb. 800 , 478 N.W.2d 349 (1992); State v. Twohig, 238 Neb. 92 , 469 N.W.2d 344 (1991). “Reasonable suspicion entails some minimal level of objective justification for detention, something more than an inchoate and unparticularized suspicion or ‘hunch,’ but less than the level of suspicion required for probable cause.” State v. Staten, 238 Neb. at 18, 469 N.W.2d at 116-17 . Reasonable suspicion, as a prerequisite for a constitutional investigatory stop, cannot be based only on a police officer’s desire to verify compliance with motor vehicle registration statutes.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Bowers
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.