State v. Rushing’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
59 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently October 2018 · most notably State v. Deck (1999), Doe v. Phillips (2006)
59 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 Terry v. Ohio · Adams v. Williams · Texas v. Brown · Minnesota v. Dickerson · Arizona v. Hicks
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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In Minnesota v. Dickerson, 508 U.S. 366 , 113 S.Ct. 2130 , 124 L.Ed.2d 334 (1993), the Supreme Court approved the “plain-feel” exception to the warrant requirement. The court reasoned that if “a police officer lawfully pats down a suspect’s outer clothing and feels an object whose contour or mass makes its identity immediately apparent, there has been no invasion of the suspect’s privacy beyond that already authorized by the officer’s search for weapons; if the object is contraband, its warrantless seizure would be justified....” Id. at 375-76 , 113 S.Ct. at 2137 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Hawkins · State v. Kelley“sufficient evidence to support a finding of probable cause even though [the officer] felt the container rather than the cocaine itself.” Id. at 33 . Given the officer's training and experience, “[t]he distinctive character of the container itself revealed its probable contents to the trained officer.” Id. A dissent in Rushing reasoned that “the effect of the majority opinion is to reduce the probable cause standard to one of reasonable suspicion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“In sum, the following elements properly support a finding that [the police officer] had probable cause to conclude that Rushing was carrying cocaine before he seized the container: 1) the officer’s feel of the object, 2) his knowledge of the suspicious transaction observed by [the juvenile officer], 3) the reputation of the neighborhood as a drug trafficking area, and 4) his knowledge of commonly used drug containers.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Kelley
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.