Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 700 So. 2d 222 - State v. Harris

700 So. 2d 222 - State v. Harris’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
November 1999
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Horton v. California · 410 So. 2d 1381 - State v. Hernandez · L & M Hair Care Products, Inc. v. State, Department of Transportation & Development · 623 So. 2d 908 - State v. Tate

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

  1. “In Horton v. California, 496 U.S. 128 , 110 S.Ct. 2301 , 110 L.Ed.2d 112 (1990), the Court held that evidence found in plain view need not have been found inadvertently in order to fall within this exception to the warrant requirement, although in most cases evidence seized pursuant to this exception will have been discovered inadvertently.”
    2 later decisions 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.