550 So. 2d 1074 - White v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 district · 7 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"We begin our analysis of the instant tip with an expression of agreement with the commentator that the factors of Aguilar [ v. Texas , 378 U.S. 108 , 84 S.Ct. 1509 , 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964),] and its progeny are still 'highly relevant.' We also note that the weight of each factor cannot be set by a strict across-the-board rule, but rather depends on the totality of the circumstances of each case. However, we do declare the following two principles in determining the presence of the factors. First, corroboration of the details of the anonymous informer's tip — even innocent details — may establish the informant's veracity. See Note, Stop and Frisk Based Upon Anonymous Telephone Tips [39 Wn. Lee L.Rev. 1437, 1450-51 (1982)]. We strongly caution, however, that the details corroborated should be impressive, as to number and specificity, under the particular circumstances, if corroboration is to be utilized to establish the tipster's credibility. This brings us to our second principle: detail in the anonymous tip can support the inference that the informant has an adequate basis of knowledge. Id. at 1449-50. However, the detail must demonstrate that the anonymous informant had special familiarity with the affairs of the suspect. 3 W. LaFave, supra, at § 9.3(e), p. 484. For an example of cases wherein a detailed tip, which proved through corroboration to be accurate *Page 1236 in all innocent details, can furnish the reasonable suspicion necessary for a Terry stop, see White v. Unit”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Moynes v. State · 565 So. 2d 1233 - Williams v. State

2. “"The process does not deal with hard certainties, but with probabilities. . . . [T]he evidence thus collected must be seen and weighed not in terms of library analysis by scholars, but as understood by those versed in the field of law enforcement."”

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

3. “Stop and Frisk Based Upon Anonymous Telephone Tips,”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 251 N.J. Super. 617 - State v. Williams