Hankerson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2010
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
November 2012
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Ornelas v. United States · Parker v. State · 820 So. 2d 1012 - Coney v. State · 976 So. 2d 1229 - Robinson 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]n this case [Officer] Lucas did not see what [the] defendant exchanged for money. [Officer] Schmidt did not see what was in his shoe. They did not see him similarly involved in more than one occasion. These patterns on which they rely also occur in innocent public transactions and are not unique to narcotics violations. These patterns may be enough to inform a suspicion for further investigation — perhaps even enough for a Terry stop or a stop under the Florida Stop and Frisk Law — but they fall short of the requirements for probable cause. As in Coney , police did not have probable cause to search him without his consent.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Hankerson
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.