Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 576 So. 2d 953 - Saavedra v. State

576 So. 2d 953 - Saavedra v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1991

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
4
states following
May 2019
most recently cited

29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably Pierce v. State (2000), 622 So. 2d 952 - Saavedra v. State (1993)

29 state decisions

170199120002010decided

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 Wong Sun v. United States · Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · Payton v. New York · United States v. Matlock · Bumper v. North Carolina

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

  1. “However, the fact that the same victim is sexually battered in the same manner more than once in a criminal episode by the same defendant does not conclusively prohibit multiple punishments. Spatial and temporal aspects are equally as important as distinctions in character and type in determining whether multiple punishments are appropriate.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The Fourth Amendment protects the individual's privacy in a variety of settings. In none is the zone of privacy more clearly defined than when bounded by the unambiguous physical dimensions of an individual's home — a zone that finds its roots in clear and specific constitutional terms: "The right of the people to be secure in their ... houses . .. shall not be violated." That language unequivocally establishes the proposition that "[a]t the very core [of the Fourth Amendment] stands the right of a man to retreat into his own home and there be free from unreasonable governmental intrusion." Silverman v. United States, 365 U.S. 505, 511 , 81 S.Ct. 679, 683 , 5 L.Ed.2d 734 . In terms that apply equally to seizures of property and to seizures of persons, the Fourth Amendment has drawn a firm line at the entrance to the house. Absent exigent circumstances, that threshold may not reasonably be crossed without a warrant.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “[T]wo important factors to consider in determining valid consent by a child are the age of the child and the scope of the consent given. Consent must be given freely and voluntarily in order to be valid; such a determination is a question of fact to be gleaned from the totality of the circumstances.”
    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.