Love v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The determination of third-party consent, like other factual determinations relating to searches and seizures, must be judged against an objective standard. See Hilliard v. State, 321 Ark. 39 , 900 S.W.2d 167 (1995). Simply stated, that standard is: would the facts available to the police officer at the moment warrant a man of reasonable caution to believe that the consenting party had authority over the premises? See id. This court has recognized that a warrantless search can be valid where voluntary consent has been given by a third party with sufficient control or authority over the premises. See Spears v. State, 270 Ark. 331 , 605 S.W.2d 9 (1980). Whether consent by that party is valid under the Fourth Amendment standards rests upon mutual use of the property by persons generally having joint access or control for most purposes. See Grant v. State, 267 Ark. 50 , 589 S.W.2d 11 (1979). The pertinent question is whether the one giving consent possesses common authority or other sufficient relationship to the premises. See id.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 94 Ark. App. 259 - Turner v. State