256 N.J. Super. 430 - State v. Cancel’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently April 2018
17 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 Florida v. Royer · United States v. Place · California v. Greenwood · State v. Johnson · State v. Roth
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he officers' comment to defendant that she would be detained while they obtained a search warrant was a fair prediction of events that would follow, not a deceptive threat made to deprive her of the ability to make an informed consent.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Moreover, the police used the dog to sniff for narcotics before the defendant was in any way detained. Thus it cannot be said that she was detained without reasonable suspicion. Had she been detained without reasonable suspicion until a narcotics-sniffing dog was brought to the scene an argument could have been made that the detention was unlawful and the evidence later uncovered should be suppressed. [ Id. at 435 , 607 A. 2d 199 (emphasis added).]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“why warrantless police use of narcotics-sniffing dogs is permitted under [both] the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution... [and] under article I, paragraph 7 of the New Jersey Constitution.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.