Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 696 A2D 1334 - Quarles v. State

Quarles v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
1
states following
July 2019
most recently cited

1 district · 18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently July 2019

1 district · 18 state decisions

130199720002010decided

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 Terry v. Ohio · Illinois v. Gates · Florida v. Royer · United States v. Mendenhall · United States v. Cortez

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

  1. “The officer, of course, must be able to articulate something more than an 'inchoate and unparticularized suspicion or hunch.’ ”). 41 . The American Civil Liberties Union filed amicus curiae briefs in this case. The ACLU contends that this Court should view this case as an opportunity to hold that Article I, Section 6 of the Delaware Constitution prohibits the State from using any type of profiling as factors to justify a warrantless search or seizure. The ACLU argues that this case demonstrates the danger of racial and drug courier profiling. Although both Harris and Green, the man he met at the station, are black, the police in this case did not testify that race was a factor in the drug courier profile or even a "non-profile”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “[T]he agent could not as a matter of law, have reasonably suspected the petitioner of criminal activity on the basis of these observed circumstances. Of the evidence relied on, only the fact that the petitioner preceded another person and occasionally looked backward at him as they proceeded through the concourse relates to their particular conduct. The other circumstances describe a very large category of presumably innocent travelers, who would be subject to virtually random seizures were the Court to conclude that as little foundation as there was in this case could justify a seizure. 39”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “To determine when a seizure has occurred under article I, Section 6 of the Delaware Constitution, we 'focus[ ] upon the police officer's actions to determine when a reasonable person would have believed he or she was not free to ignore the police presence.'”
    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.