Nicholas v. Goord’s Empirical Analysis
430 F.3d 652 · 2005
Citation profile
38 federal appellate · 5 district · 21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 96 later decisions — most recently September 2022 · most notably California Public Employees' Retirement System v. New York Stock Exchange, Inc. (2007), 47 Cal. 4th 1104 - People v. Robinson (2010)
38 federal appellate · 5 district · 21 state decisions — followed in 12 states
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 Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co. · Bell v. Wolfish · Chimel v. California · Schmerber v. State of California · Hudson v. Palmer
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 96 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“serve[s] as [its] immediate purpose an objective distinct from the ordinary evidence gathering associated with crime investigation.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Berg v. Kelly · Park v. State“[g]iven that the state likely already has a plethora of identifying information about [them], in light of their status as convicted felons,”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“a more nuanced approach to law-enforcement concerns. . . . Lidster instructs courts to examine carefully the type of law-enforcement concern served by a particular search or seizure regime. . . . [W]e find it crucial that the state, in collecting DNA samples, is not trying to determine that a particular individual has engaged in some specific wrongdoing. Although the DNA samples may eventually help law enforcement identify the perpetrator of a crime, at the time of collection, the samples in fact provide no evidence in and of themselves of criminal wrongdoing, and are not sought for the investigation of a specific crime.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Banks v. Gonzales · State v. Martin
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.