Taylor v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

13 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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(1) the officer must not have violated the Fourth Amendment in arriving at the place from which the evidence could be plainly viewed; (2) the incriminating character of the evidence must be immediately apparent; and (3) the officer must have a lawful right of access to the object itself.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Vassar v. State · Hixson v. State

2. “[W]e agree that 18 U.S.C. § 922 (d)(1) prevented the return to Taylor of the illegally seized items. 18 U.S.C. § 922 (d)(1) states that it is “unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of’ any firearm or ammunition to any person who is under indictment or convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year. Since Taylor’s pending charge fell within the prohibitions of this section, Taylor could not lawfully demand the return of the firearms and ammunition. The same reasoning applies to Taylor’s second request for return of these items at sentencing. As a convicted felon, Taylor was not entitled to possess firearms or ammunition. 18 U.S.C. § 922 (g); see also United States v. Bagley, 899 F.2d 707, 708 (8th Cir.1990), cert, denied, 498 U.S. 938 , 111 S.Ct. 343 , 112 L.Ed.2d 307 (1990). Therefore, the district court did not err in ordering these items to remain in the possession of law enforcement, subject to Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 7-2-105 (Lexis 1999)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Dobson v. Stahla