Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 79 So. 3d 236 - King v. State

79 So. 3d 236 - King v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2012

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
October 2018
most recently cited

10 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on United States v. Matlock · United States v. Echegoyen · United States v. Reilly · 344 So. 2d 559 - Silva v. State · 981 So. 2d 585 - McDonnell v. State

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

  1. “Thus, federal law suggests that the inevitable discovery doctrine will not be applied in every case where the police had probable cause for a warrant, but failed to get one. The cases focus on whether the police made an effort to get a warrant prior to the illegal search and whether strong probable cause existed for the search warrant.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “If the basis for the asserted authority is not clear, the officer must conduct further 3The detectives' testimony was equivocal as to the timing of Rodda's statement that he had been asleep, and the trial court made no specific finding. -5- inquiry before relying on the third party’s representations.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[T]here is no right on the part of a third party to consent to a search of personal property belonging to another person unless there is evidence of both common authority over and mutual usage of the property.”
    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.