State v. Bolanos’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
29
cited by 29 later decisions
3
states following
January 2013
most recently cited
29 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Mohamed v. United States · State v. Lamme · Carlson v. Plouffe · State v. Kyles
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"We conclude that under the facts of this case, Parker had a reasonable and articulable suspicion that the defendant committed or was about to commit a crime. First, although the informant's identity was not known to Parker at the time that he received the information, the informant's identity was ascertainable because he was an employee of Flashbacks, a nightclub familiar to the police through past contacts. "When an informant provides sufficient information so that he may be located and held accountable for providing false information, the officer is justified in assuming the caller is being truthful in so identifying himself." Playle v. Commissioner of Public Safety , 439 N.W.2d 747 , 748 (Minn.App. 1989). In Playle, the police had a tip from an unnamed employee of a local restaurant that a drunk driver was leaving the premises. The court deemed that sufficient information to identify the informer. See Minnetonka v. Shepherd , 420 N.W.2d 887 , 890 (Minn. 1998); Glover v. State , 870 S.W.2d 198 , 200 (Tex.App. 1994). Moreover, citizen informers are presumptively reliable if they are identifiable. See State v. Barrett , 40 Conn. Sup. 547 , 551 , 525 A.2d 558 (1985), aff'd., 10 Conn. App. 667 , 525 A.2d 139 (1987); see also State v. Rodriguez , 223 Conn. 127 , 141 n. 11, 613 A.2d 211 (1992); State v. Daley , 189 Conn. 717 , 723-25 , 458 A.2d 1147 (1983). Second, it is reasonable to infer that the employee who furnished the information knew when a person was under the influenc”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“We conclude that under the facts of this case, Parker had a reasonable and articulable suspicion that the defendant committed or was about to commit a crime. First, although the informant's identity was not known to Parker at the time that he received the information, the informant's identity was ascertainable because he was an employee of Flashbacks, a nightclub familiar to the police through past contacts.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“An investigatory stop is authorized if the police officer had a reasonable and articulable suspicion that a person has committed or is CT Page 10028 about to commit a crime. . . . Reasonable and articulable suspicion is an objective standard that focuses not on the actual state of mind of the police officer, but on whether a reasonable person, having the information available to and known by the police, would have had that level of suspicion. . . . The police officer's, decision . . . must be based on more than a hunch or speculation. . . . In justifying the particular intrusion the police officer must be able to point to specific and articulable facts which, taken together with rational inferences from those facts, reasonably warrant that intrusion.”
2 later decisions 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.