Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 322 Md. 183 - Ricks v. State

Ricks v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1991

Citation profile

43
cited by 43 later decisions
4
states following
March 2020
most recently cited

43 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently March 2020 · most notably Commonwealth v. White (1995), In Re Tariq A-R-Y (1997)

43 state decisions

2201991200020102020decided

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 · United States v. Robinson · United States v. Chadwick

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

  1. “Ricks does not contest the intermediate appellate court’s determination, which affirmed the trial court’s denial of the motion to suppress, that his arrest was supported by the requisite probable cause. Indeed, at oral argument before us, Ricks conceded that he was lawfully arrested, at least at the point when the dog scratched his bag, indicating that it contained narcotics.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “When an arrest is made, it is reasonable for the arresting officer to search the person arrested in order to remove any weapons that the latter might seek to use in order to resist arrest or effect his escape. Otherwise, the officer’s safety might well be endangered, and the arrest itself frustrated. In addition, it is entirely reasonable for the arresting officer to search for and seize any evidence on the arrestee’s person in order to prevent its concealment or destruction.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “The Fourth Amendment protects individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures. A warrantless search or seizure is per se unreasonable, unless the police can show that it falls within one of a carefully defined set of exceptions. Gamble v. State, 318 Md. 120, 123 , 567 A.2d 95 (1989); Stackhouse v. State, 298 Md. 203, 209 , 468 A.2d 333 (1983); Howell v. State, 271 Md. 378, 379 , 318 A.2d 189 (1974). A search incident to a valid arrest is one of the limited exceptions to the warrant requirement. Chimel v. California, supra [ 395 U.S. 752 , 89 S.Ct. 2034 , 23 L.Ed.2d 685 (1969) ]; Colvin v. State, 299 Md. 88, 98 , 472 A.2d 953 , cert. denied, 469 U.S. 873 [ 105 S.Ct. 226 , 83 L.Ed.2d 155 ] (1984).”
    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.