Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 59 Idaho 695 - State v. Conner

State v. Conner’s Empirical Analysis

1939

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
6
states following
June 2015
most recently cited

28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2015 · most notably United States v. Rabinowitz (1950), 142 W. Va. 18 - State v. Carduff (1956)

28 state decisions

100193919401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Weeks v. United States · Albert Adams v. People of the State of New York · State v. Peterson · 91 W. Va. 659 - State v. Wills

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

  1. “The rule is well settled in this state that evidence, procured in violation of defendant's constitutional immunity from search and seizure, is inadmissible and will be excluded if request for its suppression be timely made.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “When the bottles of whiskey and the glasses were offered in evidence their admission was objected to, by appellant, on the ground that they were procured in a search made without a search-warrant in violation of his constitutional rights. Search and seizure, made incidental to a lawful arrest, is not prohibited as being unreasonable within the meaning of our constitution, art. I, sec. 17, and evidence seized is not thereby rendered inadmissible.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““Advisory instruction to acquit.— If, at any time after the evidence on either side is closed, the court deems it insufficient to warrant a conviction, it must advise the jury to acquit the defendant. But the jury are not bound by the advice.””
    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.