Ray v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently December 2013
2 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 Coolidge v. New Hampshire · Sedillo v. United States · Horton v. California · Arizona v. Hicks
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In the present case, the discovery of the pistol was a lawful consequence of the authorized search which brought the pistol within the plain view of Officer Carroll. However, the incriminating character of the pistol was not immediately apparent to Officer Carroll because its defaced serial number could not be seen by the officer until he picked up the pistol and turned it over. In picking up the pistol and turning it over Officer Carroll extended the search beyond the scope permitted by the warrant. (Énfasis nuestro). Id., pág. 696. (8)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Pueblo v. Báez López
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.