Brinegar v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
165 F.2d 512 · 1947
Citation profile
30 federal appellate · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 1983 · most notably Brinegar v. United States (1949), Upshaw v. United States (1948)
30 federal appellate · 6 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.
Appellate journey
Relationships
Relies on McNabb v. United States · Lisenba v. People of State of California · Bram v. United States · Go-Bart Importing Co. v. United States · United States v. Mitchell
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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`The mere questioning of a suspect while in the custody of police officers is not prohibited either as a matter of common law or due process.' Neither will the fact that the arrest, under which the person was taken into custody, was illegal, in and of itself render a confession or an incriminating statement involuntary. The test is whether, under all of the facts and circumstances, the confession or incriminating statement was voluntarily made.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"To show probable cause it is not necessary that the arresting officer should have had before him legal evidence of the suspected illegal act. * * * It is enough if the apparent facts which have come to his attention are sufficient in the circumstances, to lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that liquor is illegally possessed in the automobile to be searched.” 2”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““To constitute an arrest, there must be actual or constructive seizure or detention of the person, performed with the intention to effect an arrest and so understood by the person detained.””
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.