United States v. Perdoma’s Empirical Analysis
621 F.3d 745 · 2010
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
Appellate journey
Relationships
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Katz v. United States · Chimel v. California · Whren v. United States · New York v. Belton · Florida v. Bostick
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“while the explanation in Gant of the rationale for searches incident to arrest may prove to be instructive outside the vehicle-search context in some cases, we agree with the Government that this is not such a case.”); United States v. Brewer, 624 F.3d 900, 905-06 (8th Cir.2010) (finding that”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[I]f an officer smells the odor of marijuana in circumstances where the officer can localize its source to a person, the officer has probable cause to believe that the person has committed or is committing the crime of possession of marijuana.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[The officer] had probable cause to arrest [the defendant] for marijuana possession once he detected the odor of marijuana emanating from [him].”
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.