Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 392 So. 2d 454 - State v. Smith

392 So. 2d 454 - State v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
1
states following
February 2018
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently February 2018

1 federal appellate · 14 state decisions

801980199020002010decided

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 Mapp v. Ohio · Payton v. New York · United States v. Matlock · Linkletter v. Walker · Rawlings v. Kentucky

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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “In a case, such as presented here, in which police officers are working in a large urban police department, a request (or "wanted") by one police officer alerting others that he has probable cause to arrest a suspect can be acted upon by other police officers. The test of the validity of the arrest, for purposes of the exclusionary rule, ultimately rests upon whether the investigating officers had sufficient facts to support probable cause. See United States v. Ragsdale, 470 F.2d 24 (5th Cir.1972).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “"[it] is indisputable ... that in every case in which the court has addressed the retroactivity problem in the context of the exclusionary rule, whereby concededly relevant evidence is excluded in order to enforce a constitutional guarantee that does not relate to the integrity of the fact finding process, the court has concluded that any such new constitutional principle would be accorded only prospective application."”
    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.