Richard v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “include[ ] victims of crime or persons who personally witness a crime. These individuals generally come forward with information out of the spirit of good citizenship and the desire to assist law enforcement officials in solving crime. They are usually one-time informants and no basis exists from prior dealings to determine their reliability. Further, information of this type usually goes to past completed crimes rather than future or continuing crimes. Some jurisdictions have therefore held that informants of this type are to be considered reliable for the purpose of determining probable cause unless incriminating circumstances exist which cast suspicion upon the informant's reliability.”

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

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.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Daniel Sparks v. State of Indiana

3. “that there are two major types of informants, professional informants and cooperative [or concerned] citizens, and that the test for determining the reliability of each is different.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Kellems v. State