92 Okla. Crim. 63 - Johnson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1950
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently August 1994
15 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 70 Okla. Crim. 179 - Hoppes v. State · 50 Okla. Crim. 36 - Bowen v. State · 59 Okla. Crim. 360 - Lamb v. State · 82 Okla. Crim. 91 - Jones v. State · 64 Okla. Crim. 86 - Bowdry 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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A search of an automobile without a search warrant and not as an incident of a lawful arrest, and not on any probable cause of the commission of a felony, but on mere suspicion violates the constitutional provision forbidding unreasonable searches or seizures, and evidence obtained by such a search is inadmissible. “Where an officer, after lawfully stopping or restraining a person, becomes aware that an offense is being committed or is about to be committed in the officer’s presence, he may lawfully arrest the offender without a warrant, but where the officer becomes aware of the facts constituting the offense after making an unlawful arrest, the arrest cannot be justified as being for an offense committed in the officer’s ‘presence’. “The search of motorist’s automobile without warrant of arrest, or search warrant or knowledge that automobile contained intoxicating liquor, after motorist was unlawfully arrested, was an ‘unreasonable search’ within meaning of the'Constitution giving the right to be secure against ‘unreasonable searches,’ and evidence obtained from the motorist should have been excluded in prosecution for the unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““The fact that defendant might have crossed the center line of the highway a few inches during the drive was merely used as a subterfuge by the officers-to cover up their determination to search defendant’s car.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Shirey 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.