Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 545 NW2D 178 - State v. Glaesman

State v. Glaesman’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

44
cited by 44 later decisions
2
states following
March 2020
most recently cited

43 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently March 2020 · most notably State v. Gregg (2000), State v. Herrick (1997)

43 state decisions

1501996200020102020decided

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 · Wong Sun v. United States · Massler v. United States · South Dakota v. Nebraska · Tate 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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “No seizure within the context of the Fourth Amendment occurs when an officer approaches a parked vehicle if the officer inquires of the occupant in a conversational manner, does not order the person to do something, and does not demand a response. Not all citizen-law enforcement encounters implicate a citizen’s Fourth Amendment rights; a seizure occurs only when a law enforcement officer, by means of physical force or show of authority, in some manner restrains the liberty of a citizen.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “`after conflicts in testimony are resolved in favor of affirmance, there is sufficient competent evidence fairly capable of supporting the trial court's findings, and the decision is not contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[T]he burden is on the city to establish either a reasonable and articulable suspicion for the stop or some reasonable basis for treating the conduct as a proper “community caretaker contact.” Given the state of the record before it, the court cannot determine the basis for the contact with the defendant. On this basis it is the opinion of the Court that the City has failed to carry its burden of proof.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.