607 So. 2d 361 - Chevere v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
43 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently October 2018 · most notably 808 So. 2d 1148 - Taylor v. State (2000), State v. Otwell (1999)
43 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 Illinois v. Gates · Barker v. Wingo · Carroll v. United States · Brinegar v. United States · United States v. Marion
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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`This court has long held that warrantless searches are per se unreasonable, unless they fall within one of the recognized exceptions to the warrant requirement. See, e.g., Chevere v. State , 607 So.2d 361 , 368 (Ala.Cr.App. 1992). These exceptions are: (1) plain view; (2) consent; (3) incident to a lawful arrest; (4) hot pursuit or emergency; (5) probable cause coupled with exigent circumstances; (6) stop and frisk situations; and (7) inventory searches. Ex parte Hilley , 484 So.2d 485 , 488 (Ala. 1985); Chevere , supra, 607 So.2d at 368 .'”
8 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Urioso v. State · Bosner v. State“[C]orroborative evidence need not refer to any statement or fact testified to by the accomplice. Neither must it be strong nor sufficient of itself to support a conviction. The probative value of the evidence need only legitimately tend to connect the accused with the crime and need not directly do so. Further, corroborative evidence need not directly confirm any particular fact nor affirm each and every material fact testified to by the accomplice. Corroboration may be proven by circumstantial evidence alone.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Scott v. State · Leitner v. State“tend to connect the defendant with the commission of the crime.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Bosner v. State · Leitner 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.