Steve Rivera v. John P. Keane, Superintendent, & Sing Sing Corr. Facility, 101 F.3d 682 (2d Cir. 1996). · Go Syfert
Search
Steve Rivera v. John P. Keane, Superintendent, & Sing Sing Corr. Facility, 101 F.3d 682 (2d Cir. 1996). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“liberality and flexibility in evaluating qualifications should be the rule; the proposed expert should not be required to satisfy an overly narrow test of his own qualifications.”
97 citation events (52 in the last 25 years) across 12 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: United States v. Flesher (armfor, 2014-07-08)
Treatment trajectory · 1996 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1996 2011 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) United States v. Flesher
C.A.A.F. · 2014 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
liberality and flexibility in evaluating qualifications should be the rule; the proposed expert should not be required to satisfy an overly narrow test of his own qualifications.
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Colombo v. CMI Corp.
W.D.N.Y. · 1998 · signal: see also · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
dau-bert only prescribes judicial intervention for expert testimony approaching the outer boundaries of traditional scientific and technological knowledge
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Jackson v. Mastrangelo
W.D.N.Y. · 2025 · confidence medium
Mar. 17, 2023) (“[W]ith respect to the pat frisk, ‘as long as a police officer has probable cause to arrest a suspect prior to searching the suspect, the search [of plaintiff’s person] will be valid, even if the officer initially had no intention of arresting the suspect.’ Because the arresting officers had probable cause to arrest Guillen for his unilluminated license plate, they could properly frisk him for weapons, even though he had yet to be arrested.” (quoting United States v. Koron, 101 F.3d 682, 683 (2d Cir. 1996))); Guerrero v. City of New York, No. 12-CV-02916, 2013 WL 6738…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Guillen v. City of New York
S.D.N.Y. · 2023 · confidence medium
Second, with respect to the pat frisk, “as long as a police officer has probable cause to arrest a suspect prior to searching the suspect, the search [of plaintiff’s person] will be valid, even 16 United States v. Koron, 101 F.3d 682, 683 (2d Cir. 1996).
discussed Cited "see" Evans v. Solomon
E.D.N.Y · 2010 · signal: see · confidence high
See U.S. v. Koron, 101 F.3d 682 , 1996 WL 197234, at *2 (2d Cir.1996) (unpublished) (“Moreover, we have held that, as long as a police officer has probable cause to arrest a suspect prior to searching the suspect, the search will be valid, even if the officer initially had no intention of arresting the suspect.”). *251 Applying these principles, an officer should be entitled to search an individual for his identification once probable cause to arrest was established regardless of the officer’s decision to arrest or not arrest the individual.
cited Cited "see" Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Kunze
Tex. App. · 1999 · signal: see · confidence high
See id.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Graham v. Playtex Products, Inc.
N.D.N.Y. · 1998 · signal: see also · confidence low
See Safrani v. Werner Co., 1997 WL 729110 at *1 (S.D.N.Y.); see also Lappe v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc., 857 F.Supp. 222, 228 (N.D.N.Y.1994) (Hurd, M.J.) {“Daubert’s narrow focus is on the admissibility of novel scientific evidence under Fed.R.Evid. 702.”), aff'd, 101 F.3d 682 (2d Cir.1996).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Steve Rivera
v.
John P. Keane, Superintendent, and Sing Sing Correctional Facility
95-2614.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Apr 16, 1996.
101 F.3d 682
Unpublished
2 passages pin-cited by 2 cases
Pinpoint authority: bottom 90%
Citer courts: Court of Appeals for the Armed… (1) · W.D. New York (1)

101 F.3d 682

NOTICE: THIS SUMMARY ORDER MAY NOT BE CITED AS PRECEDENTIAL AUTHORITY, BUT MAY BE CALLED TO THE ATTENTION OF THE COURT IN A SUBSEQUENT STAGE OF THIS CASE, IN A RELATED CASE, OR IN ANY CASE FOR PURPOSES OF COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL OR RES JUDICATA. SEE SECOND CIRCUIT RULE 0.23.
Steve RIVERA, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
John P. KEANE, Superintendent, and Sing Sing Correctional
Facility, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 95-2614.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

April 16, 1996.

1

Appearing for Appellant: John A. Cirando, Syracuse, N.Y.

2

Appearing for Appellees: John F. Carroll Jr., Ass't Dist. Att'y, Bronx, N.Y.

3

S.D.N.Y.

4

AFFIRMED.

5

Before LUMBARD, KEARSE and MORAN,[*] District Judge.

6

This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of record from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, and was argued by counsel.

7

ON CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, it is now hereby ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the judgment of said District Court be and it hereby is affirmed substantially for the reasons stated in Judge Haight's Memorandum Opinion and Order dated July 6, 1995, and the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Bernikow dated August 19, 1994, adopted by Judge Haight.

8

We have considered all of petitioner's contentions on this appeal and have found them to be without merit. The judgment of the district court is affirmed.

*

Honorable James B. Moran, of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, sitting by designation