Smoak v. Hall’s Empirical Analysis
460 F.3d 768 · 2006
Citation profile
30 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 109 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably Everson v. Leis (2009), Livermore Rohm v. Lubelan (2007)
30 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 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 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Graham v. Connor · Florida v. Royer · United States v. Mendenhall
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 109 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a particularized and objective basis for suspecting the particular person . . . of criminal activity based on specific and articulable facts.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[Reasonable suspicion] requires more than just a 'mere hunch,' but is satisfied by a likelihood of criminal activity less than probable cause, and 'falls considerably short of satisfying a preponderance of the evidence standard.' "). It is true that the district court used the phrase "probable cause”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[I]f a flyer or bulletin has been issued on the basis of articulable facts supporting a reasonable suspicion that the wanted person had committed an offense, then rebanee on the flyer or bulletin justifies a stop to check identification ..., to pose questions to the person, or to detain the person briefly while attempting to obtain further information.If the flyer has been issued in the absence of a reasonable suspicion, then a stop in the objective reliance upon it violates the Fourth Amendment. In such a situation, of course, the officers making the stop may have a good-faith defense to any civil suit.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Dorsey v. Barber
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.