948 So. 2d 583 - Harris v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

13 state decisions

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

1. “' Ivey v. State , 698 So. 2d 179 , 185-86 (Ala. Cr. App. 1995), aff'd, 698 So. 2d 187 (Ala. 1997) (quoting Riley v. State , 583 So. 2d 1353 , 1355 (Ala. Cr. App. 1991)).”

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. T.A.P. v. State · J.T.C. v. State

2. “"The Fourth Amendment generally requires police to secure a warrant before conducting a search. California v. Carney , 471 U.S. 386 , 390-391 (1985). As we recognized nearly 75 years ago in Carroll v. United States , 267 U.S. 132 (1925), there is an exception to this requirement for searches of vehicles. And under our established precedent, the `automobile exception' has no separate exigency requirement. We made this clear in United States v. Ross , 456 U.S. 798 (1982), when we said that in cases where there was probable cause to search a vehicle `a search is not unreasonable if based on facts that would justify the issuance of a warrant, even though a warrant has not been actually obtained.' (Emphasis added.) In a case with virtually identical facts to this one (even down to the bag of cocaine in the trunk of the car), Pennsylvania v. Labron , 518 U.S. 938 (1996) ( per curiam ), we repeated that the automobile exception does not have a separate exigency requirement: `If a car is readily mobile and probable cause exists to believe it contains contraband, the Fourth Amendment . . . permits police to search the vehicle without more.' Id. , at 940. "In this case, the Court of Special Appeals found that there was `abundant probable cause' that the car contained contraband. This finding alone satisfies the automobile exception to the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement, a conclusion correctly reached by the trial court when it denied respondent's motion to suppress."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Black

3. “No additional exigent circumstances are required for the warrantless search of a vehicle; probable cause alone is sufficient to bring a search within the automobile exception.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Black