People v. Tottenhoff’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

24 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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “brief in duration, limited in scope, and narrow in purpose.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. People v. Rodriguez · People v. Garcia

2. “Because the district court’s suppression ruling addressed only the seizure of the cocaine and money from the defendant’s person and not the seizure of the items from the passenger compartment of the defendant’s automobile, the propriety of the officer’s seizure of these items from the passenger compartment of the defendant’s automobile is not an issue on this appeal. We note, however, that when a person has been stopped while operating a motor vehicle and thereafter arrested in or about the vehicle, the arresting officer may search the passenger compartment of the automobile as incident to the arrest. A search of the entire vehicle may also be justified if there is independent probable cause to believe the vehicle contains contraband or evidence of criminal activity.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. People v. McMillon

3. “Police may undertake intermediate intrusions such as investigatory stops consistent with the Fourth Amendment as long as three conditions are satisfied: (1) there is a specific and articulable basis in fact for suspecting that criminal activity has taken place, is in progress, or is about to occur (that is, 'reasonable suspicion'); (2) the purpose of the intrusion is reasonable; and (8) the seope and character of the intrusion are reasonably related to its purpose.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. People v. Pigford