Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 70 F.3d 913 - United States v. Biggs

United States v. Biggs’s Empirical Analysis

70 F.3d 913 · 1995

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
3
states following
December 2023
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 1 district · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently December 2023 · most notably State v. Adams (Slip Opinion) (2015), United States v. Taylor (2001)

13 federal appellate · 1 district · 7 state decisions

1801995200020102020decided

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. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 924

Relies on Maryland v. Buie · Stoner v. California · Halas v. Department of Energy · Hebert v. Brown · Kalan Inc. v. United States

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

  1. “[a] ‘protective sweep’ is a quick and limited search of premises, incident to an arrest, conducted to protect the safety of police officers and others. It is narrowly confined to a cursory visual inspection of those places in which a person might be hiding.... Beyond that, however, ... there must be articu-lable facts which, taken together with the rational inferences from those facts, would warrant a reasonably prudent officer in believing that the area to be swept harbors an individual posing a danger to those on the arrest scene.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[i]n order for officers to undertake a protective sweep of an area they must articulate facts that would warrant a reasonably prudent officer to believe that the area to be swept harbored an individual posing a danger to those on the scene.”
    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.