Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 261 Neb. 403 - State v. Roberts

State v. Roberts’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

38
cited by 38 later decisions
2
states following
March 2019
most recently cited

38 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Chimel v. California · New York v. Belton · Preston v. United States · State v. Silvers · United States v. Silva

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

  1. “Warrantless searches and seizures are per se unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment, subject only to a few “ ‘ “ ‘specifically established and well-delineated exceptions,’ ” ’ ” State v. Craven, 253 Neb. 601, 606 , 571 N.W.2d 612, 617 (1997), which “must be strictly confined by the exigencies which justify [their] initiation,” State v. Ortiz, 257 Neb. [784,] 815, 600 N.W.2d [805,] 828 [(1999)]. “In the case of a search and seizure conducted without a warrant, the State has the burden of showing the applicability of one or more of the exceptions to the warrant requirement.” State v. Craven , 253 Neb. [601,] 606, 571 N.W.2d [612,] 617 [(1997)].”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Warrantless searches and seizures are per se unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment [to the U.S. Constitution,] subject only to a few “““specifically established and well-delineated exceptions,’ ” ’ ” [citation omitted], which “must be strictly confined by the exigencies which justify [their] initiation.” [Citation omitted.] “In the case of a search and seizure conducted without a warrant, the State has the burden of showing the applicability of one or more of the exceptions to the warrant requirement.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““[a]n officer, who is present at the scene of the arrest for purposes of assisting in it, if necessary, is an ‘arresting officer’ within the meaning of the statute even though a different officer actually places his hand upon the defendant and informs him that he is under arrest.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.