State v. Arroyo’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 1 district · 59 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently January 2017 · most notably State v. Thurman (1993), State v. Ramirez (1991)
1 federal appellate · 1 district · 59 state decisions
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 Terry v. Ohio · Wong Sun v. United States · Katz v. United States · Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · Florida v. Royer
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 62 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Two factors determine whether consent to a search is lawfully obtained following initial police misconduct. The inquiry should focus on whether the consent was voluntary and whether the consent was obtained by police exploitation of the prior illegality. Evidence obtained in searches following police illegality must meet both tests to be admissible.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“`the totality of all the surrounding circumstances both the characteristics of the accused and the details of police conduct.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. State v. Genovesi · State v. Harmon“We need not hold that all evidence is fruit of the poisonous tree simply because it would not have come to light but for the illegal actions of the police. Rather, the more apt question in such a case is whether granting establishment of the primary illegality, the evidence to which instant objection is made has been come at by exploitation of the illegality or instead by means sufficiently distinguishable to be purged of the primary taint.”
2 later decisions 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.