State v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 52 state decisions

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

1. “[W]e are not persuaded that Mena can be read as an alteration or abandonment of the rules regarding the limited scope of a Terry stop.... [W]e hold that the [Kansas] Court of Appeals erred in ruling that Mena allows law enforcement officers to expand the scope of a traffic stop to include a search not related to the purpose of the stop, even if a detainee has given permission for the search.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 44 Kan. App. 2d 960 - State v. White · State v. Washington

2. ““An unconstitutional seizure may infect or taint the consent to search as well as any fruits of tire encounter if the nature of the seizure renders the consent to search involuntary. [Citations omitted.] Conversely, a voluntary consent to search can purge the primary taint of an illegal seizure where the connection between the lawless conduct of law enforcement officers and the discovery of the challenged evidence has become so attenuated as to dissipate the taint. [Citations omitted.]” Smith, 286 Kan. at 419 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 47 Kan. App. 2d 182 - State v. Wendler · 40 Kan. App. 2d 216 - State v. Morlock

3. “[a]n appellate court does not 'reweigh evidence, pass on the credibility of witnesses, or resolve conflicts in the evidence.'”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Sanders · State v. Tatro