Arizona v. Evans’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
279 federal appellate · 87 district · 656 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,341 later decisions (31 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2026 · most notably George Smith Warden v. Lee Robbins (2000), Ohio v. Robinette (1996)
279 federal appellate · 87 district · 656 state decisions — followed in 38 states
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 Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Erie Co v. Tompkins · Illinois v. Gates · United States v. Leon · Mapp v. Ohio
Cited together with United States v. Leon · Illinois v. Krull · Herring v. United States · United States v. Calandra · Illinois v. Gates
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 1,341 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[w]here the exclusionary rule does not result in appreciable deterrence, then, clearly, its use is unwarranted.”
18 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“no basis for believing that application of the exclusionary rule in these circumstances will have a significant effect on ... court clerks [who] are not adjuncts to the law enforcement team engaged in the often competitive enterprise of ferreting out crime,”
14 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[u]nder [Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032 , 103 S.Ct. 3469 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1201 (1983)], state courts are absolutely free to interpret state constitutional provisions to accord greater protection to individual rights than do similar provisions of the United States Constitution.” Arizona v. Evans, 514 U.S. 1, 8 , 115 S.Ct. 1185 , 131 L.Ed.2d 34 (1995).”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Dodson · State v. Genson
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.