Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 722 So. 2d 863 - State v. Rewis

722 So. 2d 863 - State v. Rewis’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
2
states following
February 2015
most recently cited

14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently February 2015

14 state decisions

70199820002010decided

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

Relies on Terry v. Ohio · D & J Industries, Inc. v. St. Columba Episcopal Church · 31 Wash. App. 833 - Campbell v. Department of Licensing · Tocci v. State · 717 So. 2d 184 - Foy v. State

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

  1. “Although the deputies were given the tip by the passing driver, for all practical purposes he was an anonymous tipster. His identity is unknown, any means of locating him is unknown, as are his motives for disclosing the information. He might have pointed out the Firebird because he was angered by its driver, might have been cut off by the driver or been the recipient of an obscene gesture, or for any reason other than the one he gave deputies. The deputies had no way to corroborate the information, and agreed at the hearing that they had not themselves seen anything that would have given them reason to stop the Firebird other than the tip.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “detailed and specific information corroborated by police investigation”
    1 later decision 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.