State v. Orr’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
144 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 146 later decisions — most recently February 2026 · most notably State v. Mays (2008), State v. Murrell (2002)
144 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 Delaware v. Prouse · Camara v. Municipal Court of City and County of San Francisco · See v. City of Seattle · United States v. Martinez-Fuerte · Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz
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 146 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, as applied to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, provides: 'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.' " State v. Eatmon , 4th Dist. Scioto No. 12CA3498, 2013-Ohio-4812 , 2013 WL 5914938 , ¶ 11. " Section 14, Article I of the Ohio Constitution also prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“Compounding the danger to the public from unlicensed drivers is the fact that much of the danger is hidden from plain view. While many types of dangerous motorists — drunk drivers, for example— exhibit erratic driving, the unlicensed driver often displays no observable characteristics. Police officers on roving patrol cannot pull over a vehicle for the sole purpose of checking the driver’s license and registration. Therefore, without checkpoints, the only way in which police can identify an unlicensed driver is by waiting for the driver to commit a driving offense. In at least some instances, the offense would not even have occurred had the offending driver been detected earlier and been removed from the roadways.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Hicks““The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and possessions, against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated; and no warrant shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, particularly describing the place to be searched, and the person and things to be seized.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Murrell
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.