United States v. Patrick’s Empirical Analysis
899 F.2d 169 · 1990
Citation profile
31 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 84 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2022 · most notably Ornelas v. United States (1996), United States v. Gaskin (2004)
31 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 3731 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 952
Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Illinois v. Gates · Wong Sun v. United States · Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · United States v. United States Gypsum Co.
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 84 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“if the law enforcement official, on the basis of the totality of the circumstances, has sufficient knowledge or reasonably trustworthy information to justify a person of reasonable caution in believing that an offense has been or is being committed by the person to be arrested.” See United States v. Patrick, 899 F.2d 169, 171 (2d Cir.1990) (citing Brinegar v. United States, 338 U.S. 160, 175-76 , 69 S.Ct. 1302 , 93 L.Ed. 1879 (1949)). 29 . N.Y.Crim.Proc.L. § 140.10(l)(b) (McKinney's 1992) (hereinafter”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he information they had about Patrick — that he entered the Immigration office with Taylor at a time when no others were present and they both had accidentally crossed into Canada — provided an adequate basis for the officers to reasonably believe that Patrick was not just a mere innocent traveling companion but was traveling and acting in concert with Taylor in transporting the cocaine.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The Court stressed that the only thing the police knew about Ybarra upon entering the tavern and up to the point when he was searched was that he was present in the tavern, along with others, at a time when the police had a reasonable basis to believe that the bartender had heroin to sell. This alone was insufficient to constitute probable cause.”
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.