In re Powers’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 district · 18 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. ““It seems to us, that the eleventh article of our state Constitution, and the corresponding provisions in the United States Constitution, have no reference to the subject now before the court. It is in these words: ‘That the people have a right to hold themselves, their houses, papers and possessions, free from search or seizure; and therefore warrants, without oath or affirmation first made, affording sufficient foundation for them, whereby any officer or messenger may be commanded or required to search suspected places, or seize any person or persons, his, her, or their property, not particularly described, are contrary to that right, and ought not to be granted.’ This seems to be directed against general warrants, and general search warrants in particular, not specifically describing the persons, places, or property, to be searched, or arrested. This class of warrants, which in troublous and un settled periods in English history, wore issued to a very alarming extent, by their Secretaries of State, and other magistrates perhaps, was prohibited, at the final settlement of the realm upon the Prince of Orange, and the Hanover family, I think, if not earlier; and similar provisions have been transferred to the United States and to most of the state Constitutions. It is very obvious this proceeding is not of that character. And it has never been supposed to prohibit arrests by private persons, or without warrant, in that class of cases where delay would be perilous. Necessity i”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Snyder