61 Wash. App. 111 - State v. Colin’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently April 2016
13 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 Bell v. Wolfish · Anthony v. United States · 102 Wash. 2d 432 - State v. Jackson · 96 Wash. 2d 383 - State v. Hartzog · Hill v. Bogans
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Here, a search warrant had been issued which expressly authorized the search of a Hispanic male matching Mr. Colin’s description.. .. . . . The search warrant was executed for the express purpose of procuring controlled substances likely to be found on . . . the person described in the warrant. Such substances could be readily concealed on the person so that they would not be found without a strip search. The scope of the search, while more intrusive than a search of a person’s outer garments, was justified by the State’s interest in obtaining criminal evidence.[ 12 ]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“is to remove or arrange some or all of a person's clothing so as to permit an inspection of the person's genitals, buttocks, anus, or undergarments, or of a female person's breasts. RCW 10.79.070(1). To conduct a”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Hampton“Here, a search warrant had been issued which expressly authorized the search of a Hispanic male matching Mr. Colin's description.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Hampton
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.