66 N.C. App. 127 - State v. Massenburg’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently August 2009
12 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 United States v. Ross · New York v. Belton · State v. Harvey · Youngberg v. Romeo ex rel. Romeo · State v. Thompson
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"While we admit there is some difference between a locked glove compartment and a closed but unlocked one, we do not believe the Supreme Court intended to make a distinction between them with respect to a search incident to arrest. In the recent case of United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798 , 102 S. Ct. 2157 , 72 L. Ed. 2d 572 (1982), the Supreme Court held that where police officers have probable cause to search a vehicle, they may conduct a warrantless search of every part of the vehicle, including all containers and packages within it, that may conceal the object of the search, that is, as thorough as a magistrate could authorize in a warrant particularly describing the place to be searched. The scope of the search is not defined by the nature of the container in which the contraband is secreted but is defined by the object of the search and the places in which there is probable cause to believe it may be found. United States v. Ross, supra at 824, 102 S. Ct. at 2172 , 72 L. Ed. 2d at 593 . Furthermore, the Court stated: 'A lawful search of fixed premises generally extends to the entire area in which the object may be found and is not limited by the possibility that separate acts of entry or opening may be required to complete the search.' Id. at 820-21 , 102 S. Ct. at 2170 , 72 L. Ed 2d at 591. "We conclude from our reading of these two cases that the Supreme Court has evidenced an intent to allow a warrantless search of a locked glove compartment pursuant to a lawful arres”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[T]he Washington Constitution provides greater protection to individuals against warrantless searches of their automobiles than does the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. This is a strict rule with narrowly construed exceptions.”
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.