Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 16 F.3d 69 - United States v. Johnson

United States v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

16 F.3d 69 · 1994

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
4
states following
September 2022
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently September 2022

10 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

901994200020102020decided

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 18 U.S.C. § 1956 (§ 1352 of the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 666

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Chimel v. California · Brown v. Illinois · New York v. Belton · United States v. Robinson

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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “that public employer intrusions on the constitutionally protected privacy interests of government employees for noninvestigatory, work-related purposes, as well as for investigations of work-related misconduct, should be judged by the standard of reasonableness under all the circumstances.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “On appeal from the denial of a motion to suppress we review the district court's factual findings under the clearly erroneous standard and its conclusions of law de novo.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “precisely the type of generalized, warrantless search prohibited by Chimel.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.