State v. Hyland’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

46 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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The Fourth Amendment ... merely proscribes those [searches] which are un-reasonable_ Thus, we have long approved consensual searches because it is no doubt reasonable for the police to conduct a search once they have been permitted to do so.” Florida v. Jimeno, 500 U.S. 248 , -, 111 S.Ct. 1801, 1803 , 114 L.Ed.2d 297 (1991). [[Image here]] “The standard for measuring the scope of a suspect’s consent under the Fourth Amendment is that of ‘objective’ reasonableness — what would the typical reasonable person have understood by the exchange between the officer and the suspect?” Jimeno , 500 U.S. at -, 111 S.Ct. at 1803-4 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Malaney · State v. Cook

2. “The issue Hyland raises reaches in two directions. First, if the detention extends beyond the time reasonably necessary to effect its imtial purpose, the seizure may lose its lawful character (assuming no new factual predicate for reasonable suspicion is found during the period of the lawful seizure.) ... As to the first prong, the record reveals that Sergeant Brown’s imtial questions about Hyland’s personal possessions occurred as, or immediately after, Hyland handed Brown the documentation necessary to complete the written traffic warning. Hyland’s consent to the search of the trunk occurred during the time reasonably necessary to carry out the purposes of the traffic stop. Hyland’s claims relating to the length of the stop are not supported by the record in this case and are thus devoid of merit.”

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

3. “Where consent is lawfully obtained, law enforcement officers may conduct a search commensurate in scope with the permission given. This is so even though the search was not otherwise supported by probable cause or reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218, 219 , 93 S.Ct. 2041, 2043 , 36 L.Ed.2d 854 (1973). “The Fourth Amendment ... merely proscribes those (searches) which are unreasonable.... Thus, we have long approved consensual searches because it is no doubt reasonable for the police to conduct a search once they have been permitted to do so.” Florida v. Jimeno, — U.S. -, -, 111 S.Ct. 1801, 1803 , 114 L.Ed.2d 297 (1991). (Emphasis added.)”

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