Maryland v. King’s Empirical Analysis
569 U.S. 435 · 2013
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 6 district · 71 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3142 (Bail Reform Act of 1984) · 18 U.S.C. § 3145 (Bail Reform Act of 1984)
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Terry v. Ohio · Illinois v. Gates · Katz v. United States · Mapp v. Ohio
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 114 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The touchstone of the Fourth Amendment is reasonableness.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“DNA identification is an advanced technique superior to fingerprinting in many ways, so much so that to insist on fingerprints as the norm would make little sense to either the forensic expert or a layperson. The additional intrusion upon the arrestee's privacy beyond that associated with fingerprinting is not significant ... and DNA is a markedly more accurate form of identifying arrestees.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Pena v. Lindley“Th[e] application of 'traditional standards of reasonableness' requires a court to weigh 'the promotion of legitimate governmental interests' against 'the degree to which [the search] intrudes upon an individual's privacy.'”
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.