Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 435 N.W.2d 394 - State v. Henderson

State v. Henderson’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
8
states following
October 2010
most recently cited

9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently October 2010

9 state decisions

401988199020002010decided

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 Oliver v. United States · California v. Greenwood · Bierkamp v. Rogers · State v. Bishop · State v. Campbell

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

  1. “We find the Supreme Court’s rationale [in Greenwood ] persuasive. The defendant here also put opaque plastic bags in an area which they were customarily removed by trash collectors .... The Supreme Court has stated any Fourth Amendment analysis must turn on such factors as “ouh societal understanding that certain areas deserve the most scrupulous protection from government invasion.” We agree with the Supreme Court that “society as a whole possesses no such understanding with the regard to garbage left for collection at the side of a public street.” We determine the use of evidence obtained by searching defendant’s garbage did not intrude upon his legitimate expectation of privacy and therefore, was properly considered by the magistrate in issuing a search warrant of the defendant’s premises.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[Respondents exposed their garbage to the public sufficiently to defeat their claim to Fourth Amendment protection. It is common knowledge that plastic garbage bags left on or at the side of a public street are readily accessible to animals, children, scavengers, snoops, and other members of the public.... [H]aving deposited their garbage “in an area particularly suited for public inspection and, in a manner of speaking, public consumption, for the express purpose of having strangers take it,” respondents could have had no reasonable expectation of privacy in the inculpatory items that they discarded.”
    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.