353 So. 2d 265 - State v. Tapp’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently November 2016
16 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 Wong Sun v. United States · Schmerber v. State of California · Brown v. Illinois · Rochin v. People of California · Nardone v. United States
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“When he saw the policemen, he (Mr. Tapp) quickly put a small tinfoil object, covered with cellophane into his mouth. Because the officers believed he was trying to swallow a packet of heroin, the three officers set upon him and attempted to force the packet out of his mouth. Tapp resisted their efforts and the ensuing fight rolled onto the front porch, down the steps, and into the yard where two other officers joined the fight. One officer held his hands around the defendant's throat in an effort to prevent the defendant from swallowing the evidence. According to the officers, they pummeled the defendant in the face and head with their fists, and called on [the] defendant to `Spit it out'.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“They also held defendant's nose to cut off his breathing, and defendant eventually spit out the packet. The fight lasted fifteen to twenty minutes. The Supreme Court noted the lack of evidence in the record that the material, if swallowed, would not have traveled through defendant's body without destruction or harm to defendant. The Court found that”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Desmond“this was not the `minor intrusion into an individual's body under stringently limited conditions' approved in Schmerber [v. California], 384 U.S. at 772 , 86 S.Ct. at 1836 , but rather a grievous, dangerous, painful and unjustifiable assault upon a human being in an effort to get physical evidence from inside his body.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Desmond
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.