Wilson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 district · 19 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The affidavit can establish probable cause either by setting out the incriminating personal observations of a reliable affiant (usually a police officer who is presumptively reliable), or it 'may be based on incriminating reports to the af-fiant by some informer or third party witness; i. e., hearsay. If the affidavit is based on hearsay, it must contain reasonable corroboration of the hearsay reports. Under the two-fold standard set out in Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108, 114 , 84 S.Ct. 1509, 1514 , 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964), this means (1) that the magistrate must be satisfied that the affidavit reveals the underlying circumstances from which the informant drew the conclusion that criminal activity had occurred ; and (2) that there are sufficient reasons for believing that the informant’s information is reliable.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Carter v. State · Shantz v. State

2. ““A search warrant can be legally issued only upon an affidavit establishing sufficient grounds for the warrant. The affidavit must state facts constituting probable cause to search; i.e., facts sufficient to warrant a reasonable man in the belief that seizable property would be found in a particular place or on a particular person. Ca rroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132 , 45 S.Ct. 280 , 69 L.Ed. 543 (1924). “The affidavit can establish probable cause either by setting out the incriminating personal observations of a reliable affiant (usually a police officer who is presumptively reliable), or it may be based on incriminating reports to the af-fiant by some informer or third party witness; i.e. hearsay. If the affidavit is based on hearsay, it must contain reasonable corroboration of the hearsay reports. Under the two-fold standard set out in Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108, 114 , 84 S.Ct. 1509, 1514 , 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964), this means (1) that the magistrate must be satisfied that the affidavit reveals the underlying circumstances from which the informant drew the conclusion that criminal activity had occurred; and (2) that there are sufficient reasons for believing that the informant’s information is reliable.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Martin v. State

3. “The State may not claim citizen-informer status for this informant. This was not the case of an average law-abiding citizen doing her civic duty by reporting a crime; in such case the mere revelation of identity and reporting of criminal activity by the citizen may be enough to constitute probable cause... . This informant was not a passive observer of a crime; she was a confessed drug-law violator and robbery participant, presumably cooperating with the police for personal reasons.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 502 So. 2d 990 - State v. Novak