United States v. Tinkle’s Empirical Analysis
655 F.2d 617 · 1981
Citation profile
16 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2016 · most notably United States v. Muniz-Melchor (1990), Tinkle v. United States (1982)
16 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
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. § 1510 · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 18 U.S.C. § 3731 · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act)
Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Carroll v. United States · Brinegar v. United States · Beck v. State of Ohio · United States v. Brignoni-Ponce
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The test is whether ordinarily, reasonable men, possessed of the experience and knowledge of (the arresting officers) would conclude that the transaction ... was more likely than not a criminal transaction.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The existence of ‘probable cause,’ justifying an arrest without a warrant, is determined by factual and practical considerations of everyday life on which reasonable and prudent men, not legal technicians act. It is a pragmatic question to be determined in each case in the light of the particular circumstances and the particular offense involved. Probable cause does not depend on the actual state of the case in point of fact, as it may turn out upon legal investigation, but on knowledge of facts and circumstances that would be sufficient to induce a reasonable belief in the truth of the accusation. It depends on the facts known, at the time of the arrest, to the person by whom the arrest is made, from which it follows that an arrest cannot be justified by what a subsequent search discloses. On the other hand, if probable cause existed at the time of the arrest, the fact that investigation proves the person arrested to be innocent does not make the arrest unjustifiable. In determining probable cause, all the information in the officer’s possession, fair inferences therefrom, and observations made by him, are generally pertinent; and facts may be taken into consideration that would not be admissible on the issue of guilt.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Children v. Burton“The definition of probable cause [to stop and arrest] is easily stated: probable cause exists whenever the facts and circumstances known to the officer, and of which he has reasonably trustworthy information, are sufficient to warrant a person of reasonable caution to believe that an offense has been or is being committed”
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.