Bowles v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate · 36 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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““While probable cause may be supported and indeed created by information supplied by an informer, it must be demonstrated that the probability of accuracy of the ‘tip’ is sufficiently high. That is, the informer must be shown to be reliable. One manner of doing this is by referring to his past record of reliability. Another is by reference to extrinsic facts, including those which he may relate, to test his accuracy.” Bowles v. State (1971), 256 Ind. 27, 30 , 267 N.E.2d 56, 58 , citing McCray v. Illinois (1967), 386 U.S. 300 , 87 S.Ct. 1056 , 18 L.Ed.2d 62 ; Draper v. United States (1959), 358 U.S. 307 , 79 S.Ct. 329 , 3 L.Ed.2d 327 ; United States v. Franke (7th Cir. 1969), 409 F.2d 958 ; Weigel v. State (1969), 252 Ind. 464 , 250 N.E.2d 368 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 157 Ind. App. 105 - Johnson v. State · 168 Ind. App. 394 - Payne v. State

2. “From the record all that is shown is that the officer was told appellant would be in a certain area at a certain time and would be carrying narcotics. Such a "tip" might well have been telephoned in regarding one of the police officers who made the arrest of appellant. An "informer" knowing the officer's work habits could call in- and indicate that the officer would be in front of a certain building at an approximate time. Certainly this might be true. But the mere fact that this might be the case, without more, hardly supports an intrusion into the officer's personal security.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Mowrer v. State · State v. Mooney