State v. Dallmann’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
February 2006
most recently cited
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Coolidge v. New Hampshire · United States v. Ventresca · Sedillo v. United States · United States v. Martinez-Fuerte · Bibby 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The proper inquiry is whether or not the search was reasonable under the circumstances. It is essential that the particularity requirement be applied with some degree of flexibility, depending on the type of property to be seized. The purpose of the particularity requirement is to minimize the chances that the executing officer will exceed the scope of the permissible search because of confusion or uncertainty. A rigid and unrealistic reading of a search warrant is not mandated. What constitutes reasonable particularity must be determined in light of practicality, necessity and common sense.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Driscoll
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.