Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 460 S.W.2d 921 - Almendarez v. State

Almendarez v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1970

Citation profile

46
cited by 46 later decisions
1
states following
November 1989
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 44 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Aguilar v. Texas · Spinelli v. United States · Draper v. United States · United States v. Acosta · Rangel v. State

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

  1. ““It appears that this case is controlled by Draper v. United States, 358 U.S. 307 , 79 S.Ct. 329 , 3 L.Ed.2d 327 . Hereford, the Government’s informer in the Draper case, did not state the way in which he had obtained his information. He reported, however, that Draper had gone to Chicago the day before by train and that he would return to Denver by train with three ounces of heroin on one of two specified mornings. Hereford described with some particularity the clothes Draper would be wearing upon his return to Denver. The police upon meeting the inbound Denver train on the second morning specified by the informer Hereford saw a man whose dress corresponded precisely to Hereford’s detailed description. It was then apparent that Hereford had not been fabricating his report out of the whole cloth and that all but the critical fact with respect to the possession of narcotics had been verified. The search which followed Draper’s arrest was upheld. “The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in United States v. Acosta, 411 F.2d 627 , held that neither Aguilar nor its explication in Spinelli detracted from the continued vitality of Draper.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.