State v. Arrizabalaga’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The relevant inquiry is not whether particular conduct is 'innocent' or 'guilty,' but whether a sufficient degree of suspicion attaches to particular types of noncriminal acts. [Citation omitted.] The totality of the circumstances standard precludes a 'divide- and-conquer analysis' under which factors that are 'readily susceptible to an innocent explanation [are] entitled to”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. State v. Arceo-Rojas

2. “while awaiting arrival of the drug dog. The fruits of the search of the van as well as the statements made by Arrizabalaga after his arrest were suppressed. The State appealed. Court of Appeals Decision The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's granting of the second suppression motion, agreeing that Seiler”

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

3. “we need not and cannot question whether reasonable suspicion existed, and in deciding the second suppression issue we must rely on the district court's finding on the first motion that reasonable suspicion did exist.”

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