Accelerated Transp.-Pony Express, Inc. v. United States, 379 U.S. 4 (1964). · Go Syfert
Search
Accelerated Transp.-Pony Express, Inc. v. United States, 379 U.S. 4 (1964). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
21 citation events (5 in the last 25 years) across 12 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Gilles v. The People of the State of California (casd, 2019-11-01)
Treatment trajectory · 1964 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1964 1995 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Gilles v. The People of the State of California
S.D. Cal. · 2019 · confidence medium
In determining whether probable cause 1 exists for an arrest, courts consider “whether at that moment the facts and circumstances 2 within [the officer’s] knowledge . . . were sufficient to warrant a prudent man in believing 3 that the petitioner had committed or was committing an offense.” Beck v. Ohio, 379 U.S. 4 89, 91 (1964). 5 The issuance of a notice to appear in court generally does not constitute an arrest. 6 See Karam v. City of Burbank, 352 F.3d 1188, 1194 (9th Cir. 2003).
cited Cited "see" State v. Vasquez
unknown court · 2017 · signal: see · confidence high
See Beck v. Ohio, 379 U.S. 4 OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 89, 91, 85 S.Ct. 223 , 13 L.Ed.2d 142 (1964); State v. Brown, 99 Ohio St.3d 323 , 2003-Ohio-3931 , 792 N.E.2d 175 , syllabus.
cited Cited "see" State v. Taylor
Ohio Ct. App. · 1972 · signal: see · confidence high
See Henry v. Mississippi (1965), 379 U. S. 4 .43, 451, 13 L.
cited Cited "see" Middlewest Motor Freight Bureau v. United States
unknown court · 1970 · signal: see · confidence high
See Accelerated Transport-Pony Express, Inc. v. United States, 227 F.Supp. 815 (D.Vt.), aff’d, 379 U.S. 4 , 85 S.Ct. 43 , 13 L.Ed.2d 21 (1964).
cited Cited "see" Middlewest Motor Freight Bureau v. United States of America, Middlewest Motor Freight Bureau v. National Small Shipments Traffic Conference, Inc.
8th Cir. · 1970 · signal: see · confidence high
See Accelerated Transport-Pony Express, Inc. v. United States, 227 F.Supp. 815 (D.Vt.), aff'd, 379 U.S. 4 , 85 S.Ct. 43 , 13 L.Ed.2d 21 (1964).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
ACCELERATED TRANSPORT-PONY EXPRESS, INC., ET AL.
v.
UNITED STATES ET AL.
131.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 12, 1964.
379 U.S. 4
Per Curiam.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF VERMONT.

Bryce Rea, Jr., and Louis Lisman for appellants.

Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Orrick, Robert B. Hummel, Robert W. Ginnane and Betty Jo Christian for the United States et al.; W. G. Burnette for Lynchburg Traffic Bureau; Arthur A. Arsham and John J. C. Martin for National Small Shipments Traffic Conference, Inc., et al.; and John M. Cleary, John F. Donelan and Dickson R. Loos for National Industrial Traffic League, appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motions to affirm are granted and the judgment is affirmed.