United States v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
12 F.3d 760 · 1993
Citation profile
22 federal appellate · 4 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently December 2017 · most notably United States v. Maxwell (1994), United States v. Rico (1995)
22 federal appellate · 4 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
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 843 (§ 403 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Payton v. New York · Personnel Administrator of Mass. v. Feeney · Oklahoma v. New Mexico · Murphy v. Sullivan · Licht v. Texas Commerce Bank
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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“As a matter of investigative strategy, [the postal inspectors] substituted another substance for the cocaine base and placed the beeper in the package. By doing so, the inspectors created, or at least greatly increased, the risk that the evidence would be destroyed. Had they not altered the package’s contents, there would have been little or no danger of evidence being destroyed before they obtained the search warrant.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[u]nder the exigent circumstances exception, the warrant requirement is suspended “when — in the press of circumstances beyond a police officer’s control — lives are threatened, a suspect’s escape looms, or evidence is about to be destroyed ... The police themselves, however, cannot create the exigency.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“reasonableness and propriety of the investigative tactics that generated the exigency.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Swearingen v. Carle
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.