378 Wis. 2d 42 - State v. Silverstein’s Empirical Analysis
2017
Citation profile
12 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2258A · 18 U.S.C. § 2510 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2711 (§ 201 of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986)
Relies on Grayned v. City of Rockford · Alabama v. White · Massachusetts v. Upton · 50 Wis. 2d 619 - State v. Paszek · 70 Wis. 2d 179 - Ocanas v. State
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a practical, common-sense decision whether, given all the circumstances set forth in the affidavit ... including the 'veracity' and 'basis of knowledge' of persons supplying hearsay information, there is a fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found in a particular place.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[p]rove-up of every detail is not required in a warrant affidavit, as is consistent with the policy that is designed to encourage law enforcement to obtain search warrants in the first place.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The well-established test for probable cause is that it is flexible, and is a practical commonsense decision, that is made considering the totality of the circumstances.”
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.