United States v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
575 F.3d 308 · 2009
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 5 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently December 2023
8 federal appellate · 5 district ·
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. § 3231 · 18 U.S.C. § 3731 · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 844 (§ 404 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Wong Sun v. United States · United States v. Mendenhall · Florida v. Bostick · California v. Hodari D.
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[L]aw enforcement officers do not violate the Fourth Amendment by merely approaching an individual on the street or in another public place, by asking him if he is willing to answer some questions, by putting questions to him if the person is willing to listen, or by offering in evidence in a criminal prosecution his voluntary answers to such questions .... The person approached, however, need not answer any question put to him; indeed, he may decline to listen to the questions at all and may go on his way .... If there is no detention-no seizure within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment-then no constitutional rights have been infringed.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The officer told Brown he was not free to go until the robbery victim arrived. Brown had already submitted to this show of authority (the officer’s demand for him to stay) when the officer asked him to face the car and place his hands on the hood.... Brown already had submitted by following the officer’s order to stay put.... [T]he police officer clearly stated the suspect was not free to leave and the suspect complied.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“that a robbery victim was being brought over to identify [him and another individual] as possible suspects and, if they were not identified, they would be free to go-necessarily implying that they were not free to leave”
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.