State v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

21 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Reasonable cause for an investigatory stop is something less than probable cause, but the officer must be able to articulate knowledge of particular facts, which in conjunction with reasonable inferences drawn therefrom provide reasonable grounds to suspect the detainee of criminal activity. State v. Flowers, 441 So.2d 707 (La.1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 945 , 104 S.Ct. 1931 , 80 L.Ed.2d 476 (1984); Washington, supra . Nervousness may be one of the factors leading to a finding of reasonable cause to stop under Article 215.1. State v. Willis, 31,561 (La.App.2d Cir.1/20/99), 728 So.2d 493 . Public safety requires some flexibility for police officers to investigate and prevent crime. State v. Wesley, 28,012 (La. App.2d Cir.4/3/96), 671 So.2d 1257 . To assess the validity of an investigatory stop, the critical inquiry focuses on the officer's knowledge at the time of the stop. State v. Williams, 421 So.2d 874 (La.1982); Wesley, supra . When a warrant has not been obtained, the state bears the burden of proving the validity of the search at a hearing on the motion to suppress. LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 703; State v. Washington, 501 So.2d 1086 (La. App.2d Cir.1987). In the present case, the officers responded to a 911 telephone call concerning a fight that had occurred. Upon their arrival at the 1900 block of Clay Street, the officers' information included a report that a fight had occurred and that another confrontation might occur. An altercation can involve several violations of the la”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 991 So. 2d 575 - State Ex Rel. Bc

2. “It is clear from Terry that an officer must independently articulate specific facts for both the stop and frisk. Although a reasonable stop is necessarily a predecessor to a reasonable frisk, it is not inevitable that every reasonable stop requires a frisk. It is not necessary for an investigating officer to establish that a detained individual was more probably than not armed and dangerous in order to justify a patdown for weapons.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 780 So. 2d 602 - State v. Furlow

3. “It is sufficient if the officer establishes a substantial possibility of danger.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 780 So. 2d 602 - State v. Furlow