State v. Grogan’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently December 1997
12 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 · Brown v. Illinois · United States v. Calandra · United States v. Peterson · United States v. O'Looney
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.
“"A. Resisting an officer is the intentional opposition or resistance to or obstruction of an individual acting in his official capacity and authorized by law to make a lawful arrest or seizure of property or to serve any lawful process or court order when the offender knows or has reason to believe that the person arresting, seizing property, or serving process is acting in his official capacity. B. (1) The phrase `obstruction of' as used herein shall, in addition to its common meaning, signification, and connotation mean the following: (a) Flight by one sought to be arrested before the arresting officer can restrain him and after notice is given that he is under arrest. (b) Any violence toward or any resistance or opposition to the arresting officer after the arrested party is actually placed under arrest and before he is incarcerated in jail. (c) Refusal by the arrested party to give his name and make his identity known to the arresting officer. (d) Congregation with others on a public street and refusal to move on when ordered by the officer. C. Whoever commits the crime of resisting an officer shall be fined not more than five hundred dollars or be imprisoned for not more than six months, or both."”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“acting in their official capacity, while attempting to seize property, serve process or arrest ...”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“"... The Miranda warnings are an important factor, to be sure, in determining whether the confession is obtained by exploitation of an illegal arrest. But they are not the only factor to be considered. The temporal proximity of the arrest and the confession, the presence of intervening circumstances, ... and, particularly, the purpose and flagrancy of the official misconduct are all relevant...." Brown v. Illinois, 422 U.S. 590, 603-04 , 95 S.Ct. 2254, 2261-62 , 45 L.Ed.2d 416, 427 (1975)”
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.