Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 739 P.2d 85 - State v. Trujillo

State v. Trujillo’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

35
cited by 35 later decisions
1
states following
March 2018
most recently cited

35 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably State v. Sery (1988), State v. Markland (2005)

35 state decisions

1901987199020002010decided

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 · Florida v. Royer · United States v. Mendenhall · United States v. Brignoni-Ponce · Brown v. Texas

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

  1. “A peace officer may stop any person in a public place when he has a reasonable suspicion to believe he has committed or is in the act of committing or is attempting to commit a public offense and may demand his name, address and an explanation of his actions.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “[I]n justifying the particular intrusion the police officer must be able to point to specific and articulable facts which taken together with rational inferences from those facts, reasonably warrant that in-trusion_ [I]n making that assessment it is imperative that the facts be judged against an objective standard.... Anything less would invite intrusions upon constitutionally guaranteed rights based on nothing more substantial than inarticulate hunches, a result this Court has consistently refused to sanction.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. ““a request for identification cannot constitute a show of authority sufficient to convert an innocent encounter into a seizure. Only when police have in some way restrained the liberty of an individual, either by force or a show of authority, is there a ‘seizure’ within the meaning of the fourth amendment.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.