Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 745 SW2D 886 - State v. Meadows

State v. Meadows’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
January 2003
most recently cited

3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently January 2003

3 state decisions

20198719902000decided

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 Illinois v. Gates · Aguilar v. Texas · Spinelli v. United States · Jones v. United States · United States v. Ventresca

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

  1. “that the affidavit in question passes Fourth Amendment muster, under Gates . The next question is whether our Tennessee Constitution, Article I, Section 7, and the statute law of Tennessee, require a different result. We think not. This court has previously followed a “totality of the circumstances” approach in determining the validity of the issuance of a search warrant. State v. Hunt, 665 S.W.2d 751, 754 (Tenn.Crim.App.1984).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “... task of the issuing magistrate is simply to make a practical, common sense decision, where given all the circumstances set forth in the affidavit before him including the “veracity” and “basis of knowledge” of persons supplying hearsay information, there is a fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found in a particular place.”
    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.