Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 936 SW2D 565 - State v. Damask

State v. Damask’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
3
states following
February 2017
most recently cited

22 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently February 2017 · most notably White v. Director of Revenue (2010), State v. Pike (2005)

22 state decisions

150199620002010decided

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 · Mapp v. Ohio · Delaware v. Prouse · Brown v. Texas · United States v. Martinez-Fuerte

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

  1. “Id. at 573 . The degree of objective intrusion looks at factors such as how long the motorist was detained and the intensity of the investigation. Id. The degree of subjective intrusion looks at the amount of discretion available to the officers in operating the checkpoint and the extent the stop may generate concern or fright on the part of the motorist. Id.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Id. The second prong, the checkpoint's effectiveness, is not a question of whether the checkpoint is the most effective means of achieving the objective. Id. The choice among reasonable alternatives remains with the government officials”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Thus, any analysis of search and seizure questions under the Fourth Amendment is identical to search and seizure questions arising under Missouri law.” Id. (quoting State v. Damask, 936 S.W.2d 565, 570 (Mo. banc 1996)). 5 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.