Nix v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate · 25 state decisions

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

1. “We now align ourselves with those authorities, representing the majority view, which hold that apparent authority alone is required. 9 We adopt this view because it is more consistent with the fourth amendment proscription of unreasonable searches and seizures than a rule requiring actual authority regardless of reasonable appearances.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. McNairy v. State · State v. Girdler

2. ““Finally, note must be taken of a case which is quite different from Harris, namely, [1] where the guest is actually present inside the premises at the time of the giving of the consent and [2] the consent is merely to a police entry of the premises into an area where a visitor would normally be received. There is sound authority that, at least when the guest is more than a casual visitor and ‘had the run of the house,’ his lesser interest in the premises is sufficient to render that limited consent effective. It may also be suggested that [3] the apparent authority doctrine may come into play in these circumstances, so that the police are entitled to assume without specific inquiry as to that person’s status that one who answers their knock on the door has the authority to let them enter.” (3 W. LaFave, Search & Seizure §8.5(e), at 310-11 (2d ed. 1987).)”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 162 Ill. App. 3d 528 - People v. Brown · People v. White

3. “[I]mplicit in the concept of voluntariness is a balance between the need for effective criminal law enforcement at one end of the scale and, at the other, "society's deeply felt belief that the criminal law cannot be used as an instrument of unfairness, and that the possibility of unfair and even brutal police tactics poses a real and serious threat to civilized notions of justice." [ Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218, 224-25 , 93 S.Ct. 2041, 2046-47 , 36 L.Ed.2d 854, 861 (1973)] As we have observed in the context of entrapment, a special instance of police trickery, "[t]he question is really whether that conduct falls below an acceptable standard for the fair and honorable administration of justice," Pascu v. State, 577 P.2d 1064, 1067 (Alaska 1978).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Guidry v. State