Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 71 SO3D 41 - State v. Ellis

State v. Ellis’s Empirical Analysis

2010

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
July 2018
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · Florida v. Royer · Florida v. Bostick · Ohio v. Robinette

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

  1. ““ ‘[B]ecause a routine traffic stop is a limited form of seizure, it is analogous to an investigative detention, and we have therefore held that a traffic stop will be governed by the standard set forth in Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 , 88 S.Ct. 1868 , 20 L.Ed.2d 889 [(1968)].’ J.T.C. v. State, 990 So.2d 444, 447 (Ala.Crim.App.2008). “ “ ‘Terry sets up a two-prong test of the reasonableness of investigatory detentions and weapons searches. First, we must decide whether the detention was justified at its inception .... Second, the officer’s actions must be reasonably related in scope to the circumstances which justified the interference in the first place. At both stages, the reasonableness of the officer’s suspicions is judged by an objective standard taking the totality of the circumstances and information available to the officers into account.” United States v. Johnson, 364 F.3d 1185, 1189 (10th Cir.2004) (quotations and citations omitted).’ “United States v. Sanchez, 519 F.3d 1208, 1212-13 (10th Cir.2008).””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “'No particular factor should be given undue weight in determining the issue of voluntariness. The fact that a defendant was not informed of the right to refuse to consent does not, of itself, negate a finding of voluntariness. Nor does the fact that the defendant was in police custody or that the officers made a showing of force. Kennedy v. State , 640 So.2d 22 , 24-5 (Ala. Cr. App.1993), quoting Martinez v. State , 624 So.2d 711 , 715-16 (Ala. Cr. App. 1993).' Rokitski v. State , 715 So.2d 859 , 861-62 (Ala. Crim. App. 1997).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.