United States v. Hall’s Empirical Analysis
113 F.3d 157 · 1997
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently July 2018 · most notably United States v. Patayan Soriano (2003), United States v. Reeves (2000)
20 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions
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
Relies on Franks v. Delaware · United States v. Harris · Williamson v. United States · United States v. Stanert · United States v. Stanert
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“once a person believes that the police have sufficient evidence to convict him, his statement that another person is more important to his criminal enterprise than he gains little credibility from its inculpatory aspect”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“suggest[ ] the possibility that [the Complainants] would lie to the police to frame an innocent man,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Issuance of a search warrant is not accomplished in an adversary proceeding. The state magistrate depended on the prosecutor and the trooper to present him with the truth, and to bring to his attention problems with their informant’s credibility. He was misled ... This information [about the dealer’s false report] would doubtless have led to more skepticism and perhaps some questions had the magistrate known it.”
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.