Byndloss v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
58 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently August 2021 · most notably State v. Jenkins (2010), Myers v. State (2006)
58 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 · Wong Sun v. United States · Carroll v. United States · Mapp v. Ohio · Florida v. Royer
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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated ....”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures. See Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 809-10 , 116 S.Ct. 1769, 1772 , 135 L.Ed.2d 89 (1996); United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544, 550-51 , 100 S.Ct. 1870, 1875 , 64 L.Ed.2d 497 , reh’g denied, 448 U.S. 908 , 100 S.Ct. 3051 , 65 L.Ed.2d 1138 (1980). It is evident that the stopping of a vehicle and the detention of its occupants is a seizure and thus implicates the Fourth Amendment. See Whren, 517 U.S. at 809-10 , 116 S.Ct. at 1772 , 135 L.Ed.2d 89 ; United States v. Sharpe, 470 U.S. 675, 682 , 105 S.Ct. 1568, 1573 , 84 L.Ed.2d 605 (1985). “An automobile stop is thus subject to the constitutional imperative that it not be ‘unreasonable’ under the circumstances. As a general matter, the decision to stop an automobile is reasonable where the police have probable cause to believe that a traffic violation has occurred.” Whren, 517 U.S. at 810 , 116 S.Ct. at 1772 , 135 L.Ed.2d 89 (citing Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648, 653 , 99 S.Ct. 1391, 1395 , 59 L.Ed.2d 660 (1979); Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106, 109 , 98 S.Ct. 330, 332 , 54 L.Ed.2d 331 (1977) (per curiam)). How ever, the detention of a person “must be temporary and last no longer than is necessary to effectuate the purpose of the stop.” Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491, 500 , 103 S.Ct. 1319, 1325 , 75 L.Ed.2d 229 (1983) (plurality opinion).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““that, under the particular facts and circumstances present in the case sub judice, the initial stop by Sergeant Hughes was not concluded at the time the K-9 dog alerted to the presence of narcotics. Sergeant Hughes with sufficient diligence pursued the acquisition of the records check involving the validity of [the driver’s] license and registration, petitioner’s driver’s license, as well as warrant checks on both individuals. We find that the seizure or detention was reasonable under the circumstances. Therefore, there was no violation of petitioner’s Fourth Amendment or [Maryland Constitution] Article 26 rights.””
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.