Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 451 F.3d 862 - United States v. Powell

United States v. Powell’s Empirical Analysis

451 F.3d 862 · 2006

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
September 2024
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 924

Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Chimel v. California · Ornelas v. United States · Berkemer v. McCarty · New York v. Belton

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

  1. “The question before the court is whether the exception to the warrant requirement under the Fourth Amendment for a search of the passenger compartment of a car incident to a lawful custodial arrest under New York v. Belton, 453 U.S. 454, 460 , 101 S.Ct. 2860 , 69 L.Ed.2d 768 (1981), applies to a search incident to the possibility of an imminent arrest. We hold that it does not. To come within the exception, the warrantless search cannot precede a custodial arrest; otherwise, neither of the Supreme Court’s two historical rationales for the exception would apply. See Knowles v. Iowa, 525 U.S. 113, 116-117 , 119 S.Ct. 484 , 142 L.Ed.2d 492 (1998). Consequently, although the police had probable cause to arrest Ronald Powell for a misdemeanor committed in their presence, because they instead searched a nearby car before informing Powell that he was under arrest or restraining his movement in a manner that would lead a reasonable person in his position to believe he was under arrest, the search was unlawful.”
    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.