Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 609 NE2D 420 - Bradley v. State

Bradley v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
2
states following
July 2015
most recently cited

13 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently July 2015

13 state decisions

100199320002010decided

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 Chapman v. State of California · Illinois v. Gates · United States v. Leon · Nathanson v. United States · Chandler 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““In this case the affidavit referred to the informant as reliable twice, once in the printed portion of the form and then again in the body of the affidavit, when, in fact, there was no basis to conclude that the informant was reliable. Detective Sergeant Gibbs could not have had a reasonable belief in the validity of a warrant based upon an affidavit that misrepresented an anonymous informant as reliable and was so otherwise lacking in indicia of probable cause.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “The.fact that a Danny Bradley with prior robbery arrests was found in the computer to reside at the address given in the tip, and that a crime fitting the description of the one related by the .informant had actually occurred does not constitute probable cause to believe that the anonymous caller was telling the truth, or that a search at that address would yield fruits of the crime.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “involve the verification of accurate predictions of future actions of a third party, an important factor in Gates, which would give the court a substantial basis to believe that the informant had access to reliable information concerning illegal activities ....”
    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.