State v. Post’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
23 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently December 2016
23 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 · Katz v. United States · Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · Chimel v. California · Coolidge v. New Hampshire
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is well established that a warrantless search of a suspect’s person incident to and following a lawful arrest is not an unreasonable search violative of the Constitution. Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752 , 89 S.Ct. 2034 , 23 L.Ed.2d 685 (1969); State v. Loyd, 92 Idaho 20 , 435 P.2d 797 (1967); State v. Conner, 59 Idaho 695 , 89 P.2d 197 (1939). However, the logic of this exception to the warrant requirement requires that the search follow, not precede, the arrest. Johnson v. United States, [ 333 U.S. 10 , 68 S.Ct. 367 , 92 L.Ed. 436 (1948) ]. ... Thus, even assuming that prior to the search of the defendant there was probable cause for an arrest, the defendant was not in fact arrested prior to the search. There being no arrest, there could be no search incident to a lawful arrest.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Crabb“"The state, at oral argument, conceded that there was nothing in the record of this case suggesting any exigent circumstances, other than the mere presence of the car in a parking lot near a public street, and acknowledged that under our decision in State v. Miles, supra , there has not been a showing of exigent circumstances sufficient to avoid the warrant requirement on that basis." 98 Idaho at 838 , 573 P.2d at 157 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Fowler“A police officer lacking probable cause to make an arrest may nonetheless approach and detain a person for purposes of investigating possible criminal conduct. To justify such an investigative stop the police officer must be able to point to specific and articulable facts which, together with rational inferences from those facts, reasonably warrant that action.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Gallegos
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.