State v. Otwell’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

44 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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “`This court has long held that warrantless searches are per se unreasonable, unless they fall within one of the recognized exceptions to the warrant requirement. See, e.g., Chevere v. State , 607 So.2d 361 , 368 (Ala.Cr.App. 1992). These exceptions are: (1) plain view; (2) consent; (3) incident to a lawful arrest; (4) hot pursuit or emergency; (5) probable cause coupled with exigent circumstances; (6) stop and frisk situations; and (7) inventory searches. Ex parte Hilley , 484 So.2d 485 , 488 (Ala. 1985); Chevere , supra, 607 So.2d at 368 .'”

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Urioso v. State · Dardy v. State

2. “`When officers lawfully arrest an automobile occupant, they may search the passenger compartment of the automobile as a contemporaneous incident of the arrest, and they also may examine the contents of containers found in the automobile.'”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Skaggs · State v. Gargus

3. “[i]n reviewing a decision of a trial court on a motion to suppress evidence, in a case in which the facts are not in dispute, we apply a de novo standard of review.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Gargus