State v. Lindsey’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently February 2020
8 state decisions
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 United States v. Leon · State v. Mollberg · State v. Schinzing · State v. McCloskey · State v. Smith
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) The agent cannot reach the magistrate in his office during regular court hours; (b) The agent making the search is a significant distance from the magistrate; (c) The factual situation is such that it would be unreasonable for a substitute agent, who is located near the magistrate, to present a written affidavit in person to the magistrate in lieu of proceeding with a telephonic application; (d)The need for a search is such that without the telephonic procedure a search warrant could not be obtained and there would be a significant risk that evidence would be destroyed.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“When a caller informs the judge that the purpose of the call is to request a warrant, the judge shall place under oath each person whose testimony forms a basis of the application and each person applying for the warrant.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Clay, Sara Kathrine
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.