Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 622 So. 2d 67 - Morris v. State

622 So. 2d 67 - Morris v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
5
states following
August 2012
most recently cited

11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently August 2012

11 state decisions

50199320002010decided

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 Stringfellow v. Stringfellow · Alexander v. Martin · Hesselrode v. State · 421 So. 2d 1087 - State v. Tolmie · State v. Wade

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

  1. “Under the statute, the officer authorized by the warrant to conduct the search and seize the evidence designated must participate in or supervise the search even where he requires the assistance of others to do so. While the level of supervision and participation may vary depending on the circumstances, it is absolutely essential that the officer authorized be present when and where the search is conducted and carry out his responsibility to see that the warrant is properly executed and that its authorization is not exceeded. It is not enough that the authorized officer wait in another room while the search is conducted by others.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Police officers are sworn officers of the law who take appropriate oaths to carry out the provisions of the federal and state constitutions and the laws of the state and nation. This oath is of no small moment as a protection to our citizens when their privacy is lawfully intruded upon by a search pursuant to a warrant. [Police officers] are especially charged and trained to see that the search is carried out properly, lawfully, and in accord with the provisions of the warrant. There is no provision in [our statutes] that would permit this responsibility to be delegated to an unauthorized person.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “The search warrant shall in all cases be served by any of the officers mentioned in its direction, but by no other person except in aid of the officer requiring it, said officer being present and acting in its execution.”
    2 later decisions 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.