Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 491 P2D 127 - McCoy v. State

McCoy v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1971

Citation profile

59
cited by 59 later decisions
5
states following
September 2018
most recently cited

59 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently September 2018 · most notably Erickson v. State (1973), State v. Jones (1985)

59 state decisions

24019711980199020002010decided

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 Terry v. Ohio · Katz v. United States · Carroll v. United States · Mapp v. Ohio · Brinegar v. United States

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

  1. “(1) The arrest must be valid — probable cause for the arrest must exist or the search is unconstitutional. (2) The search must be roughly contemporaneous with the arrest . . . . (3) The arrest must not be a pretext for the search; a search incident to a sham arrest is not valid. (4) Finally, the arrest must be for a crime, evidence of which could be concealed on a person.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[A] peace officer, without a warrant, may arrest a person for a felony when the officer has probable cause to believe that a felony has been committed and probable cause to believe that the person committed it.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “. . . the principle of antecedent justification is so central to the Fourth Amendment that subject only to a few specifically established and well-delineated exceptions “searches conducted outside the judicial process, without prior approval by judge or magistrate, are per se unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment.” 17”
    4 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.