State v. Bean’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

21 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[t]he proof of probable cause which must be made before a search warrant may be issued must be of facts so closely related to the time of the iss[uanee] of the warrant as to justify a finding of probable cause at that time, and whether the proof meets this test must be determined by the circumstances of each ease. Generally, it may be said that no more than a “reasonable” time may have elapsed, and that the recital must be of facts so closely related to the time of issuance of the warrant as to justify a finding of probable cause at that time.... In determining whether the lapse of time has been unreasonable, heavy reliance will often be placed upon the nature of the alleged offense, a greater lapse of time being permissible where the activity is of a continuous nature as distinguished from an isolated violation. A claim of staleness of facts precluding issuance of the warrant is not to be determined by a mere computation of the number of elapsed days.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Padavich

2. “In determining whether there is probable cause to issue a search warrant, the test is “whether a person of reasonable prudence would believe a crime was being committed on the premises to be searched or evidence of a crime was being concealed there.” The facts must establish probable cause that the crime or evidence is presently being committed or concealed at the place to be searched and cannot merely establish that there was probable cause at some time in the past.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Paterno