Britton v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 44 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently January 2019 · most notably Banda v. State (1994), Mendiola v. Estelle (1981)
2 federal appellate · 44 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.
Relationships
Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Chimel v. California · Beck v. State of Ohio · Papachristou v. City of Jacksonville · McCray v. State of Illinois
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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It must be borne in mind that we are here faced with the question of proof necessary to establish probable cause for arrest rather than proof essential to a judicial determination of guilt. . Thus, when an officer is confronted with a person intoxicated in a public place, his determination as to possible danger that may befall the individual is not reviewed under the same standard used in a judicial determination of guilt.” (Emphasis added.)”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Rance v. State · Adkins v. State““It must be borne in mind that we are here faced with the question of proof necessary to establish probable cause for arrest rather than proof essential to a judicial determination of guilt. The test of probable cause for an arrest without a warrant as stated by the United States Supreme Court is Beck v. Ohio, 379 U.S. 89 , 85 S.Ct. 223 , 13 L.Ed.2d 142 (1964) and McCray v. Illinois, 386 U.S. 300 , 87 S.Ct. 1056 , 18 L.Ed.2d 62 (1967), is: Whether at that moment the facts and circumstances within the officer’s knowledge and of which (he) had reasonably trustworthy information were sufficient to warrant a prudent man in believing that the (arrested person) had committed or was committing an offense. Thus, when an officer is confronted with a person intoxicated in a public place, his determination as to probable danger that may befall the individual is not reviewed under the same standard used in a judicial determination of guilt.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Vasquez v. State · White v. State“A peace officer may arrest an offender without a warrant for any offense committed in his presence or within his view.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Holmes v. State
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.