Nottingham v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently July 2006
2 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 Mapp v. Ohio · Olmstead v. United States · 49 Okla. Crim. 422 - Doyle v. State · 46 Okla. Crim. 68 - Overstreet v. State · 45 Okla. Crim. 68 - Tucker 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In my opinion loose interpretation of this constitutional provision may well be the initial erosion of other long-standing constitutional requirements. If this exception may be allowed, then why not another, and another, until finally the requirements for a search warrant become baseless.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Anderson v. State
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.