United States v. Daniel’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently June 2012
1 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 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 28 U.S.C. § 636
Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Wong Sun v. United States · Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · Rakas v. Illinois · Florida v. Royer
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An individual’s membership in a gang may cause a police officer to have an “inchoate and unparticularized suspicion” that the individual’s every waking moment is given to criminal behavior. Terry, 392 U.S. at 27 , 88 S.Ct. at 1883 . However, it would be a perversion of the Fourth Amendment to hold that such a suspicion justifies the interruption of that individual’s privacy and liberty during any and all of those waking moments.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“One's status as a gang member, however, even a gang member with a known arrest or conviction record, does not, without more, create the reasonable and articulable suspicion necessary to justify an investigative detention”
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.