Sellman v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

37 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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “inferences ... and deductions about the cumulative information available to [police officers] ... 'might well elude an untrained person.' " United States v. Arvizu , 534 U.S. 266 , 273, 122 S.Ct. 744 , 151 L.Ed.2d 740 (2002) (quoting Cortez , 449 U.S. at 418 , 101 S.Ct. 690 ). Indeed, "[a] factor that, by itself, may be entirely neutral and innocent, can, when viewed in combination with other circumstances, raise a legitimate suspicion in the mind of an experienced officer.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. State of Maryland v. Johnson · 235 Md. App. 263 - Goodwin v. State

2. “the validity of the stop or the frisk is not determined by the subjective or articulated reasons of the officer; rather, the validity of the stop or frisk is determined by whether the record discloses articulable objective facts to support the stop or frisk.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 238 Md. App. 87 - Thornton v. State · 235 Md. App. 263 - Goodwin v. State

3. “'depends on a balance between the public interest and the individual's right to personal security free from arbitrary interference by law officers.'”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 237 Md. App. 661 - Lewis v. State · 235 Md. App. 263 - Goodwin v. State