56 Wash. App. 339 - State v. Fore’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

39 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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “bright-line” rule rests in part on traditional justifications that a suspect might easily grab a weapon or destroy evidence, the validity of a Stroud search does not depend on an arrestee being in the vehicle when police arrive or on the physical ability of an arrestee to reach into the vehicle.” State v. Fore, 56 Wn. App. 339, 347 , 783 P.2d 626 (1989) (citing Stroud, 106 Wn.2d at 152 ), review denied, 114 Wn.2d 1011 (1990). 5 Former RCW 9A.76.020 provided, in pertinent part:”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Quinlivan · 85 Wash. App. 339 - State v. Perea

2. “"the totality of the facts and circumstances within the officer's knowledge at the time of the arrest. The standard of reasonableness to be applied takes into consideration the special experience and expertise of the arresting officer."”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Graham · State v. Graham

3. “a close physical and temporal proximity between the arrest and the search.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Wheless · State v. Adams