49 Va. App. 717 - King v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
September 2016
most recently cited
10 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Bell v. Wolfish · Ornelas v. United States · Schmerber v. State of California · United States v. Robinson · 25 Va. App. 193 - McGee v. Commonwealth
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.
“Previously, we have defined a “strip search” as “an inspection of a naked individual, without any scrutiny of his body cavities.” Kidd v. Commonwealth, 38 Va.App. 433, 446 , 565 S.E.2d 337, 343 (2002). A “visual body cavity search” is more intrusive and “extends to a visual inspection of the anal and genital areas.” Id. (citation omitted). Finally, a “manual body cavity search” involves “some degree of touching or probing of body cavities” and is the most intrusive type of body search. Id. (citation omitted).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“In each case it requires a balancing of the need for the particular search against the invasion of personal rights that the search entails. Courts must consider the scope of the particular intrusion, the manner in which it is conducted, the justification for initiating it, and the place in which it is conducted.”
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.