343 So. 2d 977 - State v. Culotta’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
41 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently November 2012 · most notably State v. Ball (1983), 391 So. 2d 421 - State v. Gibson (1980)
41 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 Mapp v. Ohio · Brown v. Illinois · Stone v. Powell · United States v. Calandra · United States v. Harris
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“* * * Any person adversely affected by a search or seizure conducted in violation of this Section shall have standing to raise its illegality in the appropriate court.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Dakin · State v. Bearden“We do not believe that the scope of the constitutional provision was necessarily intended to exclude from the trial evidence otherwise untainted, secured through a search warrant, because part of the showing made in the affidavit used to secure the warrant is based upon evidence illegally obtained from third persons and inadmissible, if objected to at trial, against either them or the accused. (If the sole basis of the affidavit was such illegally-secured evidence, our conclusion might well be different.)”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“causal connection between the initial unlawful conduct and the evidence actually sought to be suppressed has become so attenuated as to dissipate its initial taint, nor are the deterrent policies and individual protections expressed by the constitutional provision [La.Const. of 1974, Art. 1, Section 5] violated by so holding.”
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.