Stout v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
57 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently January 2019 · most notably Echols v. State (1996), Walley v. State (2003)
57 state decisions
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 Terry v. Ohio · Chimel v. California · New York v. Belton · Gillette Co. v. Miner · State v. Delossantos
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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An officer who is making a lawful arrest may, without a search warrant, conduct a search of the person or property of the accused for the following purposes only: (a) to protect the officer, the accused, or others; (b) to prevent the escape of the accused; (c) to furnish appropriate custodial care if the accused is jailed; or (d) to obtain evidence of the commission of the offense for which the accused has been arrested or to seize contraband, the fruits of crime, or other things criminally possessed or used in conjunction with the offense.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Pyles v. State · McDonald v. State“wording of the two constitutional provisions at issue); Stout v. State, 320 Ark. 552 , 898 S.W.2d 457 (1995). In Stout , for example, we said: Of course, we could hold that the Arkansas Constitution provides greater protection against unreasonable searches than does the Constitution of the United States, but we see no reason to do so. The wording of each document is comparable, and through the years, in construing this part of the Arkansas Constitution, we have followed the Supreme Court cases.... [W]e choose to continue to interpret”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Sullivan
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.