State v. Asbach’s Empirical Analysis
2015
Citation profile
12
cited by 12 later decisions
1
states following
September 2021
most recently cited
12 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Nix v. Williams · Illinois v. Caballes · 135 S. Ct. 1609 - Rodriguez v. United States · United States v. Jones · City of Fairgo v. Thompson
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.
“A trial court’s finding of fact in preliminary proceedings of a criminal case will not be reversed if, after the conflicts in the-testimony are resolved in favor of affirmance, there is sufficient competent evidence fairly capable of supporting the trial court’s findings, and the decision is not contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence. We do not conduct a de . novo review. We evaluate the evidence presented to see, based on the standard of review, if it supports the findings of fact. • ,:”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Asbach“[R]equesting the driver's license and registration, requesting that the driver step out of the vehicle, requesting that the driver wait in the patrol car, conducting computer inquiries to determine the validity of the license and registration, conducting computer searches to investigate the driver's criminal history and to determine if the driver has outstanding warrants, and making inquiries as to the motorist's destination and purpose.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. State v. Vetter“[T]his Court looks at the totality of the circumstances, applies an objective standard, and takes into account the inferences and deductions that an investigating officer would make that may elude a layperson. The question is whether a reasonable person in the officer's position would be justified by some objective manifestation to suspect the defendant was, or was about to be, engaged in unlawful activity.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Vetter
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.