Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 541 F.3d 1298 - Powell v. Barrett

Powell v. Barrett’s Empirical Analysis

541 F.3d 1298 · 2008

Citation profile

52
cited by 52 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
July 2024
most recently cited

16 federal appellate · 8 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 52 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2024 · most notably Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of County of Burlington (2012), Bull v. City of San Francisco (2010)

16 federal appellate · 8 district · 2 state decisions

330200820102020decided

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 Bell v. Wolfish · Teague v. Lane · Hudson v. Palmer · Turner v. Safley · Procunier v. Martinez

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

  1. “[i]t follows from the Bell decision that the less intrusive searches in this case do not violate the Fourth Amendment.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “of strip searching all arrestees as part of the process of booking them into the general population of a detention facility, even without reasonable suspicion to believe that they may be concealing contraband[.]”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Like the majority, I recognize and appreciate the deference due to jail administrators as they fulfill their charge of ensuring security in jails, not only for the jail officials but also for the inmates. See Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520 , 547-48, 99 S.Ct. 1861 , 60 L.Ed.2d 447 (1979). At the same time, “convicted prisoners do not forfeit all constitutional protections by reason of their conviction and confinement in prison.” Id. at 545 , 99 S.Ct. 1861 . This principle applies with at least as much force to individuals detained prior to their trial on petty misdemeanor charges such as failing to pay child support, driving without a license, or trespassing. See id. These protections, such as the right to be free from degrading, humiliating, and dehumanizing treatment and the right to bodily integrity, include protection against forced nakedness during strip searches in front of others.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.