State v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
63 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 68 later decisions — most recently May 2025 · most notably State v. Domicz (2006), State of Iowa v. Randall Lee Pals (2011)
63 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 Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · Crawford v. Washington · Ohio v. Roberts · Ring v. Arizona · United States v. Watson
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 68 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“. .. [T]he right to privacy implicit in the Arkansas Constitution is a fundamental right which requires a compelling state interest to override it. This rich tradition of protecting the privacy of our citizens in their homes justified our deviating from federal common law in Picado with respect to constitutional protection in our homes. Indeed, the legal principle that a person’s home is a zone of privacy is as sacrosanct as any right or principle under out state constitution and case law. Jegley v. Picado, supra; Griffin v. State, supra. Arkansas has clearly embraced a heightened privacy protection for citizens in their homes against unreasonable searches and seizures, as evidenced by our constitution, state statutes, common law, and criminal rules.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Carson v. State · Polston v. State“Without question, a slavish following of federal precedent would render this court’s opinions merely a mirror image of federal jurisprudence, which would carry with it a certain abrogation of our duty to interpret our own state constitution and follow our own state law. Yet, we admit to a concern about deviating too much from federal precedent based solely on our state constitution. A proper balance must be struck between the two.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Sherman v. State · State v. Stites“intimidation effect of multiple police officers appearing on a home dweller's doorstep, sometimes in uniform and armed, and requesting consent to search without advising the home dweller of his or her right to refuse consent that presents the constitutional problem.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.