People v. Winden’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

15 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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[T]he fact that an officer-affiant’s statements in a warrant affidavit are not false does not necessarily end judicial scrutiny of the contents of the affidavit_ Because the decision of a judicial officer asked to issue a warrant is the cornerstone of our constitutional protections against unlawful governmental invasions of privacy, it is of paramount importance that the decision be based on a complete factual predicate. Probable cause determinations are invariably based on inferences drawn from the language appearing in warrant affidavits_ It has, therefore, been recognized that in some circumstances statements of officer-affiants may be so misleading because of the omission of material facts known to the affiant at the time the affidavit was executed that a finding of probable cause based on such statements may be deemed erroneous.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. People v. Fortune · State v. Johnson

2. “`the source of the error is intentional falsehood or reckless disregard for the truth on the part of the officer-affiant.'”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. People v. Flores · People v. Kazmierski

3. “only if its omission rendered the affidavit substantially misleading to the judge who issued the warrant”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. People v. Unruh · People v. Fortune