State v. Sims’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 75 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 82 later decisions — most recently May 2013 · most notably State v. Alston (1981), Baker v. Monroe Township (1995)
5 federal appellate · 75 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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 Wong Sun v. United States · Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · Carroll v. United States · Mapp v. Ohio · Chimel v. California
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 82 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“With regard to the Fourth Amendment demand for specificity as to the subject to be searched, there is none of the vice of a general warrant if the individual is thus identified by physical nexus to the ongoing criminal event itself. In such a setting, the officer executing the warrant has neither the authority nor the opportunity to search everywhere for anyone violating a law. So long as there is good reason to suspect or believe that anyone present at the anticipated scene will probably be a participant, presence becomes the descriptive fact satisfying the aim of the Fourth Amendment. The evil of the general warrant is thereby negated. To insist nonetheless that the individual be otherwise described when circumstances will not permit it, would simply deny government a needed power to deal with crime, without advancing the interest the Amendment was meant to serve.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“to have a search incident to a lawful arrest it is first necessary to have a valid arrest. Here, the defendants were first subjected to a search which yielded contraband and only then placed under arrest. * * * More specifically, in order for a search to be justified as incidental to a valid arrest, there must have been an intention on the part of the officers to arrest on the information possessed by them prior to the search, without regard to what the search might disclose.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a] police officer may make a warrantless search where there is probable cause to believe evidence will be discovered and he has a reasonable belief that failure to act will result in destruction or removal of evidence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.