Frasier v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““It is a fundamental principle of search and seizure law that the information given to the magistrate or judge in the application for a search warrant must be timely.” Breitweiser v. State, 704 N.E.2d 496, 499 (Ind.Ct.App.1999) (citing Sgro v. United States, 287 U.S. 206 , 53 S.Ct. 138 , 77 L.Ed. 260 (1932)). Stale informationq gives rise to a mere suspicion and not a reasonable belief, especially when the items to be obtained in a search are easily concealed and moved. Raymer v. State, 482 N.E.2d 253, 255 (Ind.1985). Although the age of the information supporting an application for a warrant can be a critical factor when determining the existence of probable cause, our courts have not established a bright-line rule regarding the amount of time which may elapse between obtaining the facts upon which the search warrant is based and the issuance of the warrant. Breitweiser, 704 N.E.2d at 499 . Instead, whether the information is tainted by staleness must be determined by the facts and circumstances of each particular case. Id.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Scott v. State · Smith v. State

2. “Information gleaned from ... eyewitnesses or victims of a crime may be relied upon in determining whether probable cause exists for a search where there are no circumstances which call the informant's motives into question.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Richard v. State · Daniel Sparks v. State of Indiana