Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 39 Wash. App. 113 - State v. O'CONNOR

39 Wash. App. 113 - State v. O'CONNOR’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
2
states following
March 2021
most recently cited

29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently March 2021 · most notably State v. Clark (2001), State v. Steinzig (1999)

29 state decisions

11019841990200020102020decided

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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Illinois v. Gates · Franks v. Delaware · Aguilar v. Texas · Spinelli 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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(1) actual deliberation on the part of the affiant, or (2) the existence of obvious reasons to doubt the veracity of the informant or the accuracy of his reports.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “`in fact entertained serious doubts as to the truth' of facts or statements in the affidavit.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[O]ne who knows the police are already in a position to charge him with a serious crime will not lightly undertake to divert the police down blind alleys. Thus, where the circumstances fairly suggest that the informant "well knew that any discrepancies in his story might go hard with him," that is a reason for finding the information rehable. In such a situation, it is the "clearly apprehended threat of dire police retaliation should he not produce accurately" more so than the admission of criminal conduct which produces the requisite indicia of reliability. (Footnotes omitted.)”
    2 later decisions 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.