Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 484 F.2d 509 - United States v. Cyzewski

United States v. Cyzewski’s Empirical Analysis

484 F.2d 509 · 1973

Citation profile

51
cited by 51 later decisions
9
states following
August 2002
most recently cited

28 federal appellate · 13 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently August 2002 · most notably Newman v. Alabama (1977), Horton ex rel. Horton v. Goose Creek Independent School District (1982)

28 federal appellate · 13 state decisions

2601973198019902000decided

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 18 U.S.C. § 3731 · 21 U.S.C. § 844 (§ 404 of the Controlled Substances Act)

Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Katz v. United States · Chimel v. California · Adams v. Williams · Warden, Maryland Penitentiary v. Hayden

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

  1. “[such a] search may continue until the law enforcement official satisfies himself that no harm would come from the passenger's boarding the plane.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “greatly damages the prophylactic purpose of the search procedure. Such an option would constitute a one-way street for the benefit of a party planning airplane mischief, since there is no guarantee that if he were allowed to leave he might not return and be more successful. Of greater importance, the very fact that a safe exit is available if apprehension is threatened, would, by diminishing the risk, encourage attempts.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “[t]he courts have consistently held airport security measures constitutionally justified as a limited and relatively insignificant intrusion of privacy balanced against the need to protect aircraft and its passengers____ Airport security measures are reasonable, therefore, insofar as they permit government agents to determine whether a suspect presents an immediate danger to air commerce.”
    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.