Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 269 Ga. App. 619 - Phillips v. State

269 Ga. App. 619 - Phillips v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2004

Citation profile

40
cited by 40 later decisions
2
states following
March 2021
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 36 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently March 2021 · most notably Fair v. State (2008), Marriott v. State (2013)

2 federal appellate · 36 state decisions

200200420102020decided

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 Jackson v. Virginia · Horton v. California · Williams v. State · Vansant v. State · Simpson v. State

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. “We apply the following standard of review to the trial court’s ruling: A trial court’s order on a motion to suppress will not be disturbed if there is any evidence to support it, and the trial court’s decision with regard to questions of fact and credibility must be accepted unless clearly erroneous. We construe all evidence presented in favor of the trial court’s findings and judgment.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “an officer in the process of executing a lawful search warrant is authorized under OCGA § 17-5-21 (b) to seize any. . . item, other than private papers, which he has probable cause to consider tangible evidence of the commission of a crime, even though the property is not listed in 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.