Sixth Circuit· 4/6/2010

United States v. Everett

Citations

601 F.3d 484
2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 7107
2010 WL 1286770

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding that a single question “taking up several seconds . . . . did not render the traffic stop an unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment”
explaining that the off-topic questioning in Mena did not violate the Fourth Amendment because it did not prolong the detention
explaining that a “measurable” delay is one that is “significant,” i.e., that unreasonably prolongs the stop
explaining that a “measurable” delay is one that is “significant,” i.e., that unreasonably prolongs the stop
explaining that “it would be irrational to conclude that officers cannot take the less intrusive measure of simply asking whether a driver has a gun” (citation modified)
determining that the officer’s questioning did not render the traffic stop an unreasonable seizure

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Boggs, Norris, Adams

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

55 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

43 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named United States v. Everett

20 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.