Knight v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently September 2012
7 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Texas 232nd Judicial District Court)
Relationships
Relies on Illinois v. Gates · Aguilar v. Texas · Spinelli v. United States · Massachusetts v. Upton · Tolentino 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The task of the issuing magistrate is simply to make a practical, commonsense decision whether, given all the circumstances set forth in the affidavit before him, including the “veracity” and “basis of knowledge” of persons supplying hearsay information, there is a fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found in a particular place. And the duty of a reviewing court is simply to ensure that the magistrate had a “substantial basis for ... concludpng]” that probable cause existed.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Meeks v. State“(1) a specific offense has been committed, (2) the specifically described property or items that are to be searched for or seized constitute evidence of that offense or evidence that a particular person committed that offense, and (3) the property or items constituting evidence to be searched for or seized are located at or on the particular person, place, or thing to be searched.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Meeks v. State“1) a specific offense has been committed; 2) the specifically described property or items that are to be searched for or seized constitute evidence of that offense or evi dence that a particular person committed that offense; and 3) the property or items constituting evidence to be searched for or seized are located at or on the particular person, place or thing to be searched.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Villegas v. State
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.