Webb v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently September 2020 · most notably Williams v. State (1995), Richardson v. State (1986)
28 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 Terry v. Ohio · Wong Sun v. United States · Brinegar v. United States · United States v. Brignoni-Ponce · Boyd v. United States
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“If a law enforcement officer who has detained a person under Rule 3.1 reasonably suspects that the person is armed and presently dangerous to the officer or others, the officer or someone designated by him may search the outer clothing of such person and the immediate surroundings for, and seize, any weapon or other dangerous thing which may be used against the officer or others. In no event shall this search be more extensive than is reasonably necessary to ensure the safety of the officer or others.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Shaver v. State · Wright v. State“It is not every search and seizure that is forbidden by the Fourth Amendment, but only the unreasonable ones. Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 , 88 S.Ct. 1868 , 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968); Hosto v. Brickell, 265 Ark. 147 , 577 S.W.2d 401 (1979); Milburn v. State, 260 Ark. 553 , 542 S.W.2d 490 (1976). The central inquiry is the reasonableness, in all the circumstances, of the particular governmental invasion of a citizen’s personal security and that inquiry becomes a dual one — whether the officer’s action was justified at the inception and whether it was reasonably related in scope to the circumstances which justified the interference in the first place. Terry v. Ohio, supra,”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Poage v. State“The clerk of a court or his deputy may, when authorized by the judge of that court, issue an arrest warrant upon the filing of an information or upon affidavit sworn to by the complainant and approved by the prosecuting attorney. Any such information or affidavit shall be indorsed by the prosecuting attorney approving the issuance of the warrant.”
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.