Knox v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The decisions of this Court concerning the Fourth Amendment probable cause requirements before a warrant for either arrest or search can issue require that the judicial officer issuing such a warrant be supplied with sufficient information to support an independent judgment that probable cause exists for the warrant. Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410 , 89 S.Ct. 584 , 21 L.Ed.2d 637 (1969); United States v. Ventresca, 380 U.S. 102 , 85 S.Ct. 741 , 13 L.Ed.2d 684 (1965); Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 , 84 S.Ct. 1509 , 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964); Rugendorf v. United States, 376 U.S. 528 , 84 S.Ct. 825 , 11 L.Ed.2d 887 (1964); Jones v. United States, 362 U.S. 257 , 80 S.Ct. 725 , 4 L.Ed.2d 697 (1960); Giordenello v. United States, 357 U.S. 480 , 78 S.Ct. 1245 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1503 (1958).””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Gordon v. State · Green v. State

2. “The actual basis for the complainant’s conclusion is omitted from the complaint. The complaint contains no allegations that the complainant spoke with personal knowledge of the matters contained [therejin and [does] not indicate any source for the complainant’s belief, nor set up sufficient information to support an independent judgment that probable cause existed. Id. at 506 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Martin · Madden v. State

3. “The holding today should not be confused with those cases which hold that the requisites of an affidavit or complaint or a complaint and information to support a prosecution are not as stringent as the requirements of a complaint or affidavit for a search warrant or an arrest warrant by which there might be a search incident to arrest. See Wells v. State, 516 S.W.2d 663 (Tex.Cr.App.1974); Cisco v. State, 411 S.W.2d 547 (Tex.Cr.App.1967); Chapa v. State, 420 S.W.2d 943 (Tex.Cr.App.1967). In Chapa , this court wrote: ‘The purpose of the complaint is to apprise the accused of the facts surrounding the offense with which he is charged in order to permit him to prepare a defense to such charge.’”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Gordon v. State