Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 460 Mich. 626 - People v. Stevens

People v. Stevens’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

45
cited by 45 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
6
states following
October 2018
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 2 district · 38 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 45 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2018 · most notably Hudson v. Michigan (2006), United States v. Langford (2002)

3 federal appellate · 2 district · 38 state decisions

390199920002010decided

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

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3109 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Wong Sun v. United States · United States v. Leon · Mapp v. Ohio · Brown v. Illinois

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

  1. “[t]o do otherwise would be an exercise of will rather than judgment.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. ““Given that the evidence would have been inevitably discovered, allowing the evidence in does not put the prosecution in any better position than it would be in had the police adhered to the knock-and-announce requirement. However, excluding the evidence puts the prosecution in a worse position than it would have been in had there been no police misconduct.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““There are both state and federal sanctions for such violations that serve as deterrents for police misconduct that are less severe than the exclusion of the evidence. Additionally, exclusion of the evidence will put the prosecution in a worse position than if the police misconduct had not occurred.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.