Corbitt v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

17 state decisions

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. ““It is undisputed that Dallas Police Officer Charles Layer arrested appellant for speeding in the City of Dallas at approximately 1:55 a. m. on September 13, 1967. After appellant’s automobile was brought to a stop appellant emerged therefrom leaving his companion therein. As he did he made ‘a stumbling faltering movement.’ As he approached, Officer Layer observed that his clothes were disarranged, his eyes were bloodshot and there was an odor of alcoholic beverage on his breath. Layer noticed the automobile bore Oklahoma state license plates and the appellant produced a valid Oklahoma driver’s license. Appellant stated that he and his companion had just returned from a trip to the Republic of Mexico. At this point the officer concluded the appellant was under the influence of intoxicants and he decided to search the automobile for intoxicating beverages. Fearing for his personal safety Layer first radioed for ‘a cover squad.’ After Officer Boyd arrived Layer searched finding an empty beer can and a bottle of pills in the automobile and another bottle of pills on appellant’s person. The bottle 1 of pills was shown by chemical analysis to be barbiturates and amphetamine.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Jones v. State

2. ““. . . it is well established in this jurisdiction that when the driver of a motor vehicle who has committed a traffic offense appears to be under the influence of an intoxicant the officer has reasonable grounds for searching the car for liquor or drugs. Richardson v. State, 163 Tex.Cr.R. 585 , 294 S.W.2d 844 ; Tabb v. State, 154 Tex.Cr.R. 613 , 229 S.W.2d 628 ; Thompson v. State, Tex.Cr.R., 398 S.W.2d 942 ; Anderson v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 391 S.W.2d 54 ; Ybarra v. State, 160 Tex.Cr.R. 487 , 272 S.W.2d 374 . ‘These searches, however, find their justification in the fact that they were incident to an offense for which the officer had probable cause to arrest, i. e., driving while under the influence of drugs or driving while intoxicated, offenses for which there exists means or instruments of commission.’ Grundstrom v. Beto, supra [D.C., 273 F.Supp. 912 ].””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Parker v. State

3. ““Under the circumstances described clearly there was probable cause as a matter of law for Officer Layer to arrest the appellant without a warrant and to search him incident to that arrest. The legal evidence did not raise an issue which required a jury charge under the provisions of Article 38.23, V.A.C.C.P., and the court did not err in failing to so charge.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Jones v. State