United States v. Weeks’s Empirical Analysis
160 F.3d 1210 · 1998
Citation profile
14 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3109 · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on United States v. Leon · Tristani v. Eastern Air Lines, Inc. · Henderson v. Brown · Wilson v. Arkansas · Richards v. Wisconsin
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the magistrate judge issuing the warrant was misled by statements made by the affiant that were false or made “in reckless disregard for the truth”; (2) “the issuing magistrate judge wholly abandoned his [or her] judicial role”; (3) the affidavit in support of the warrant is “so lacking in indicia of probable cause as to render official belief in its existence entirely unreasonable,” or (4) the warrant is “so facially deficient ... that the executing officers cannot reasonably presume it to be valid.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“have a reasonable suspicion that knocking and announcing their presence, under the particular circumstances, would be dangerous or futile, or that it would inhibit the effective investigation of the crime by, for example, allowing the destruction of evidence.”
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.