719 So. 2d 1018 - Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently January 2018
9 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1357 (§ 287 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on United States v. Brignoni-Ponce · United States v. Hensley · Whiteley v. Warden, Wyoming State Penitentiary · Illinois v. Andreas · State v. Webb
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“If the possession of probable cause on the part of the searching officer were the alpha and omega-of our inquiry the answer might be different. However, logic requires that we refocus on the broader concept — reasonableness. Unless Jones was to be derelict in his duty, Ragsdale’s car-had to be searched and had to be searched before Ragsdale could be allowed to return to it, and had to be searched during the moments that he was properly detained at this solitary and detached location. If Mullens-had not commenced the search when he did, Jones would surely have commanded it, or would have put Ragsdale in Mullens’ custody and performed it himself. There is just no way to characterize this search when and where it was made in any manner other than a reasonable one. It invaded no Fourth Amendment protec-, tion which Ragsdale could claim. Reasonableness — as its moré usual concomitant, probable cause — is founded not on technicalities, but on “factual and practical considerations of everyday life ón which reasonable and prudent men, not legal technicians, act. Factually and practically the search at this precise point; in time and space was mandated by Jones’ view of Ragsdale’s gun. The fact that one member of the team moved too swiftly, which sometimes invalidates the result, should not thwart the proof of truth here where there existed a clear justification, and indeed demand, for the prompt search made. On this night and at this spot it would be hypertechnical to insist on bifur”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Commonwealth v. Yong“[W]e need not decide whether Colangelo himself had a reasonable suspicion that Smith was carrying a weapon because we find that by application of the `fellow officer' rule, the pat down can be justified.... Based on the collective knowledge of the officers working here as a team, probable cause existed to conduct a pat down of Smith.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Dewberry v. State
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.