Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 282 N.C. 633 - State v. Miller

State v. Miller’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

83
cited by 83 later decisions
14
states following
May 2017
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 78 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 83 later decisions — most recently May 2017 · most notably State v. Arrington (1984), State v. Doe (1978)

3 federal appellate · 78 state decisions — followed in 14 states

24019731980199020002010decided

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 Mapp v. Ohio · Weeks v. United States · Alderman v. United States · Olmstead v. United States · Nathanson 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 83 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Application of the exclusionary rule in such fashion would in effect give the victims of illegal searches a license to assault and murder the officers involved — a result manifestly unacceptable and not intended by the Legislature. Although wrongfully on the premises, officers do not thereby become unprotected legal targets. Even trespassers may not be shot with impunity. . . . Therefore, the gun and all other evidence seized, if relevant and material to the murder charge, was admissible; and it was competent for all eyewitnesses, both for the State and the defendant, whether lawfully or unlawfully present, to testify regarding every relevant fact and circumstance seen or heard bearing upon the shooting[.]”
    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.