Ruark v. Colorado, 378 U.S. 585 (1964). · Go Syfert
Ruark v. Colorado, 378 U.S. 585 (1964). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
65 citation events across 19 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Sheilah C. Hicks v. United States (cadc, 1967-07-07)
Treatment trajectory · 1964 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1964 1995 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" Sheilah C. Hicks v. United States
D.C. Cir. · 1967 · signal: accord · confidence high
“To constitute an arrest, there must be an actual or constructive seizure or detention of the person, performed with the intention to effect an arrest and so understood by the person detained.” Jenkins v. United States, 161 F.2d 99, 101 (10th Cir. 1947); accord, Fisher v. United States, 324 F.2d 775 (8th Cir. 1963), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 999 , 84 S.Ct. 1935 , 12 L.Ed.2d 1049 (1964).
examined Cited "see" Donnell v. Swenson (3×)
W.D. Mo. · 1966 · signal: see · confidence high
Smith v. Crouse, 378 U.S. 584 , 84 S.Ct. 1929 , 12 L.Ed.2d 1039 (1964) (per curiam), reversing 192 Kan. 171 , 386 P.2d 295 (1963); see Ruark v. Colorado, 378 U.S. 585 , 84 S.Ct. 1935 , 12 L.Ed.2d 1042 (1964) per curiam); Daegle v. Kansas, 375 U.S. 1 , 84 S.Ct. 89 , 11 L.Ed.2d 44 (1963) (per curiam); Herrera v. Heinze, 375 U.S. 26 , 84 S.Ct. 90 , 11 L.Ed.2d 44 (1963) (per curiam); Tabb v. California, 375 U.S. 27 , 84 S. Ct. 90 , 11 L.Ed.2d 44 (1963) (per curiam); Shockey v. Illinois, 375 U.S. 22 , 84 S.Ct. 83 , 11 L.Ed.2d 43 (1963) (per curiam); Ausbie v. California, 375 U.S. 24 , 84 S.Ct. 87 ,…
examined Cited "see" Commonwealth Ex Rel. Stevens v. Myers (4×)
Pa. · 1965 · signal: see · confidence high
Smith v. Crouse, 378 U.S. 584 , 84 S. Ct. 1929 (1964) (per curiam), reversing 192 Kan. 171 , 386 P. 2d 295 (1963); see Ruark v. Colorado, 378 U.S. 585 , 84 S. Ct. 1935 (1964) (per curiam); Daegele v. Kansas, 375 U.S. 1 , 84 S. Ct. 89 (1963) (per curiam); Herrera v. Heinze, 375 U.S. 26 , 84 S. Ct. 90 (1963) (per curiam); Tabb v. California, 375 U.S. 27 , 84 S. Ct. 90 (1963) (per curiam); Shockey v. Illinois, 375 U.S. 22 , 84 S. Ct. 83 (1963) (per curiam); Ausbie v. California, 375 U.S. 24 , 84 S. Ct. 87 (1963) (per curiam).
cited Cited "see, e.g." United States v. Daniel P. Flemino
8th Cir. · 1982 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Fisher v. United States, 324 F.2d 775 (8th Cir. 1963), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 999 , 84 S.Ct. 1935 , 12 L.Ed.2d 1049 (1964).
cited Cited "see, e.g." United States v. Thomas Murphy Donahue
8th Cir. · 1976 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Fisher v. United States, 324 F.2d 775 (8th Cir. 1963), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 999 , 84 S.Ct. 1935 , 12 L.Ed.2d 1049 (1964).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." United States v. Thomas
S.D.N.Y. · 1966 · signal: see also · confidence low
While the failure to argue or object has been held to be of little significance (see People v. Abramson, 40 Misc.2d 723 , 243 N.Y.S.2d 819 (S.Ct.1963); see also, United States v. Duffy, 65 Cr. 55 (S.D.N.Y 6/30/65, per Croake, J); but see, State v. Harris, note 24, supra, 121 N.W.2d at 334 ; see also, Fisher v. United States, 324 F.2d 775, 777 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 999 , 84 S.Ct. 1935 , 12 L.Ed.2d 1049 (1964)), in the case at bar the failure to remonstrate must be taken in conjunction with the affirmative statement in answer to the policeman’s request: “sure I have nothing to h…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
RUARK
v.
COLORADO.
1173 M.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 22, 1964.
378 U.S. 585
Per Curiam.
Cited by 35 opinions  |  Published
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO.

Petitioner pro se.

Duke W. Dunbar, Attorney General of Colorado, Frank E. Hickey, Deputy Attorney General, and John E. Bush, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the Supreme Court of Colorado for consideration in light of Douglas v. California, 372 U. S. 353.

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN, dissenting.

For the reasons stated in my dissenting opinion in Smith v. Crouse, ante, p. 584, I would set this case for argument.