Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 528 SW2D 234 - Maldonado v. State

Maldonado v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

40
cited by 40 later decisions
2
states following
March 2008
most recently cited

40 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently March 2008 · most notably Amores v. State (1991), Nastu v. State (1979)

40 state decisions

1701975198019902000decided

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 Katz v. United States · Carroll v. United States · Simmons v. United States · Brinegar v. United States · Chimel v. California

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

  1. ““... Appellant’s standing was never contested in the proceedings below. The State raises the issue for the first time in its brief upon appeal. The State should not be heard to complain of an incomplete record when its failure to dispute appellant’s standing is responsible for the deficiency.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “For the next three hours, or between 9:00 a.m. and noon, Prince continued to talk to appellant in a room in the Sheriff’s office at the courthouse. Although appellant was apparently left unattended at times for this three hour period, he was nevertheless restrained of his liberty. Prince had already once restrained appellant from leaving the courthouse. If Prince had observed him trying to leave again, it is reasonable to infer that he would have stopped him again.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The scope of such a search might reasonably have been expected to include examination of all identification numbers and of any area of the truck where evidence that someone else had owned or driven the truck might reasonably be expected to be found. Hence, a search of the glove compartment, floorboards, and rear areas might, for example, turn up some document or item bearing the true owner's name.”
    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.