Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 276 Va. 533 - Logan v. Com.

Logan v. Com.’s Empirical Analysis

2008

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
2
states following
April 2012
most recently cited

5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Samson v. California · Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole v. M Scott · 47 Va. App. 168 - Logan v. Commonwealth · Anderson v. Commonwealth · 50 Va. App. 518 - Logan v. Commonwealth

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

  1. “We hold that the exclusionary rule is not applicable in a probation revocation proceeding absent a showing of bad faith on the part of the police. There is a strong public interest in receiving all evidence relevant to the question whether a probationer has complied with the conditions of probation. Application of the exclusionary rule in a probation revocation proceeding would frustrate the remedial and protective purposes of the probation system, because a court would not be permitted to consider relevant evidence of the probationer's rehabilitation or regression.”
    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.