Brick v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

42 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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(1) proximity of the consent to the arrest; (2) whether the seizure brought about police observation of the particular object they sought consent to search; (3) whether the illegal seizure was flagrant police misconduct; (4) whether the consent was volunteered rather than requested by the detaining officers; (5) whether the arrestee was made fully aware of the fact he could decline to consent and thus prevent an immediate search of the car or residence; and (6) whether the police purpose underlying the illegality was to obtain consent.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Williams v. State · Turrubiate v. State

2. “to deter unlawful conduct on the part of law enforcement personnel and to close the doors of our courts to illegally obtained evidence”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Wilson v. State · Miles v. State

3. “LaFave, supra, at 193-94. We now hold that before it can be determined that evidence derived from a warrantless but consensual search following an illegal arrest is admissible, it must first be found, by clear and convincing evidence, not only that the consent was voluntarily rendered, but also that due consideration of the additional factors listed above militates in favor of the conclusion that the taint otherwise inherent in the illegality of the arrest has dissipated. The burden, of course, is on the State.[ [10] ]”

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