Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 767 SO2D 286 - Millsap v. State

Millsap v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
4
states following
October 2016
most recently cited

15 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Terry v. Ohio · Illinois v. Gates · Katz v. United States · Berkemer v. McCarty

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

  1. “lclonstructive possession instructions are properly given as a vehicle whereby the State can prove guilt when either the drugs are not found on the defendant's person or the defendant did not confess. Millsap confessed. There was no need to instruct the jury on constructive possession.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Under the automobile exception[,] police may conduct a warrantless search of an automobile and any containers therein if they have probable cause to believe that it contains contraband or evidence of a crime.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[t]he evidence in support of probable cause `must be viewed in light of the observations, knowledge, and training of the law enforcement officers involved in the warrantless search.'”
    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.