Fox v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently January 2022 · most notably United States v. Crawford (2003), Stephens v. State (2011)
2 federal appellate · 31 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 Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Assn. · Griffin v. Wisconsin · Curry v. State · Allen v. State · 178 Ga. App. 614 - Luke 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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Fox did not agree to the condition of probation as part of the plea bargain agreement, and was not given the option to consider whether prison was an acceptable alternative in light of this condition of probation. Rather, after the plea agreement was reached and the court announced the sentence, Fox was told by a probation officer, outside the presence of his attorney and of the trial court, that the waiver of his Fourth Amendment rights was a condition of his probation. The record demonstrates that this was the first time that this condition of probation was discussed.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“might impact the question of the reasonableness of the search. Those factors are that the deputy did not attempt to contact a probation officer for input on Fox’s probation, did not involve a probation officer in the actual search, and appears to have conducted the search solely for law enforcement purposes rather than probationary purposes.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“the supervision of probationers that is necessary to operate a probation system presents special needs that may justify departures from the usual warrant and probable-cause requirements.”
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.