People v. Sullivan’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently April 2014
15 state decisions
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.
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“or the exact manner in which it is to be administered. In the usual case, there will be a formal swearing before a notary to the truth of the information provided, and any written statements submitted in support of the warrant application generally will contain the traditional jurat. This does not mean, however, that such procedural formality is sine gua non of the”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“this statutorily authorized form notice served as the procedural and functional equivalent of the more traditional type of oath or affirmation. ... Indeed, the form notice may provide a greater practical assurance against intentional misstatements of fact than the more mechanical and ofttimes routine procedure of swearing before a notary.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[FJalse statements made herein are punishable as a Class A Misdemeanor pursuant to section 210.45 of the Penal Law.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.