United States v. Ford’s Empirical Analysis
333 F.3d 839 · 2003
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently March 2025
14 federal appellate · 2 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
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on United States v. Epperson · United States v. Jackson · McMorris v. Alioto · United States v. Pedroza · United States v. Holifield
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he Supreme Court applie[s] a two-part test to decide whether a person had been seized such that Fourth Amendment protections are triggered (whether that seizure be an arrest, a Terry stop, or otherwise): first, determine whether any physical force simultaneously accompanied the officer’s show of authority, and second, determine whether the defendant failed to comply with that show of authority. If no physical force accompanied the show of authority and a person chose to ignore or reject that show of authority, the defendant is not seized until the officer applied physical force and the person submitted to the officer’s show of authority,... .,. [U]nder this test, a fleeing suspect— even one who is confronted with an obvious show of authority — is not seized until his freedom of movement is terminated by intentional application of physical force or by the suspect’s submission to the asserted authority.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“In reviewing the district court's decision on a motion to suppress, we review questions of law de novo and questions of fact for clear error.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.