Ripper v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
178 F. 24 · 1910
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 9 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 1957 · most notably Byars v. United States (1927), Albrecht v. United States (1927)
15 federal appellate · 9 district ·
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 Boyd v. United States · McCray v. United States · Albert Adams v. People of the State of New York · Veazie Bank v. Fenno · Treat v. White
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““No warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or. affirmation, arid particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons.or things to be seized.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The affidavit on which the warrant was issued set forth no facts from which the existence of probable cause could be determined; nor did the warrant itself recite the existence of such cause. There was no recital in the warrant that the officer who issued it found, or determined there was probable cause, further than the mere statement that some one had declared under oath that he had good reason to believe, and did believe, the accused was violating the law. It is true that section 3462, Rev. St. (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 2283), authorizes a search warrant to be issued upon such an affidavit, but we think that all the requisites are not there expressed. This was also the view of the Attorney General in an opinion delivered June 19, 1903 (24 Ops. Attys. Gen. 685, 6S8). The oath in writing should state the facts from which the officer issuing the warrant may determine the existence of probable cause, or there should be a hearing by him with that purpose in view. The immunity guaranteed by the Constitution should not be lightly set aside by_ a mere general declaration of a nonjudicial officer that he has reason to believe and does believe, etc. The undisclosed reason may fall far short of probable cause.””
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.