Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 597 SW2D 355 - Hardison v. State

Hardison v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
1
states following
June 2000
most recently cited

29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently June 2000 · most notably King v. State (1982), Pyles v. State (1988)

29 state decisions

260198019902000decided

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 · Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · Tarpley v. State · Honeycutt v. State · Trammell v. State

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.

  1. ““Where it is shown by satisfactory proof to a peace officer, upon the representation of a credible person, that a felony has been committed, and that the offender is about to escape, so that there is no time to procure a warrant, such peace officer may, without warrant, pursue and arrest the accused.””
    10 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"... That part of the statute which says that `the offender is about to escape' is indispensable. That such condition did not exist in the present case seems to be without dispute in fact. At the time the officer went to appellant's house, appellant was partially undressed and in bed."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “"In accordance with the strict construction given exceptions allowing warrantless arrests, this court has always required a clear showing that the person arrested was about to escape. As is often said when considering an arrest without warrant, inarticulate hunches and suspicions are not enough to justify the arrest."”
    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.