Scott v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 4 district · 73 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 81 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2020 · most notably Bailey v. State (2010), State v. Brown (2004)
2 federal appellate · 4 district · 73 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 Terry v. Ohio · Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · Johnson v. Zerbst · Florida v. Royer · Ornelas 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 81 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“That all warrants, without oath or affirmation, to search suspected places, or to seize any person or property, are grievous and oppressive; and all general warrants to search suspected places, or to apprehend suspected persons, without naming or describing the place, or the person in special, are illegal, and ought not to be granted.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Davis v. State · Brown v. State“Keenom v. State, 349 Ark. 381 , 80 S.W.3d 743, 747 (2002). The constitutional analysis begins with the knock on the door. Scott v. State, 366 Md. 121 , 782 A.2d 862, 867 (2001). The prevailing rule is that, absent a clear expression by the owner to the contrary, police officers, in the course of their official business, are permitted to approach one's dwelling and seek permission to question an occupant. Id. at 867-68.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Chiszar v. State · Hayes v. State“Id. A seizure does not occur simply because a police officer approaches a person, asks questions, or requests identification. Id. Courts examining the Fourth Amendment implications of the knock and talk procedure have held that a seizure occurs when,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Chiszar v. State · Hayes v. State
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.