Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 464 SO2D 430 - State v. Richmond

State v. Richmond’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
January 2019
most recently cited

7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently January 2019

7 state decisions

401985199020002010decided

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

Relies on Illinois v. Gates · United States v. Leon · Aguilar v. Texas · Spinelli v. United States · Thompson v. Louisiana

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

  1. ““When information is provided by an anonymous person who ‘tips’ police to criminal conduct, there must be some specific showing he is a credible person and his information is reliable. In contrast, citizen informers who are willing to be identified and who purport to have firsthand knowledge carry a high indicia of credibility and reliability in the determination of probable cause. [State vi] Morns, 444 So.2d [1200] at 1203 [(La. 1984) ]; State v. Lehnen, 403 So.2d 683 (La.1981). Therefore, the citizen informer is generally a presumptively inherently credible source, unless circumstances exist to indicate otherwise. Morris, 444 So.2d at 1203; State v. Mosley, 412 So.2d [527] at 530 [ (La.1982) ].””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “If the informant lied, but the officer reasonably believed him, it cannot be said that the officer acted without probable cause”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[a] ruling prior to trial on the merits, upon a motion to suppress, is binding at the trial.”
    1 later decision 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.