Paschall v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 state decisions

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

1. “In the present case, as in [South Dakota v. Opperman (1976) 428 U.S. 364 , 96 S.Ct. 3092 , 49 L.Ed.2d 1000 ] and [Illinois v. Lafayette (1983) 462 U.S. 640 , 103 S.Ct. 2605 , 77 L.Ed.2d 65 ], there was no showing that the police, who were following standardized procedures, acted in bad faith or for the sole purpose of investigation. In addition, the governmental interests justifying the inventory searches in Opperman and Lafayette are nearly the same as those which obtain here. In each case, the police were potentially responsible for the property taken into their custody. By securing the property, the police protected the property from unauthorized interference. Knowledge of the precise nature of the property helped guard against claims of theft, vandalism, or negligence. Such knowl edge also helped to avert any danger to police or others that may have been posed by the property.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Collins v. State