State v. Ingram’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

15 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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The first and most limited interaction is the brief police-citizen encounter, which requires no objective justification and is limited to informal questioning of the person involved. Day, 263 S.W.3d at 901 . The next level is the brief investigatory detention, which must be supported by reasonable suspicion of wrong-doing and entitles the officer to conduct a stop and frisk under the principles of Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 , 88 S.Ct. 1868 , 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968). Day, 263 S.W.3d at 901 . The third and most invasive level is the full-scale arrest, which must be supported by probable cause. Id.; accord. [State v.] Crutcher, 989 S.W.2d [295, 300 (Tenn.1999) ].”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State of Tennessee v. Christopher Lee Davis

2. “It is not sufficient that an arrest could have been made; the arrest must have been made roughly contemporaneously to the search in order for it to justify the search as incident to an arrest.”); Lovelace v. Commonwealth, 258 Va. 588 , 522 S.E.2d 856, 860 (1999) (rejecting”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Thomas M. Butler v. United States

3. “The ultimate conclusion [as to] whether the facts establish that a person was under custodial arrest is one of law.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Meyer v. State