Schencks v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
2 F.2d 185 · 1924
Citation profile
33 federal appellate · 8 district · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently August 1984 · most notably United States v. Lawson (1974), Lansdowne v. State (1980)
33 federal appellate · 8 district · 10 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
Relies on Boyd v. United States · Weeks v. United States · Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States · Gouled v. United States · Egan v. United States
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 55 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(a) A search warrant may be issued * * « a United States commissioner for the District of Columbia when any narcotic drugs are * * * possessed * * * and any such narcotic drugs * * * may be seized thereunder * H: “(b) A search warrant cannot be issued but upon probable cause supported by affidavit particularly describing the property and the place to be searched. “(c) The judge or commissioner must, before issuing the warrant, examine on oath the complainant and any witnesses he may produce, and require their affidavits or take their depositions in writing and cause them to be subscribed by the parties making them. “(d) The affidavits or depositions must set forth the facts tending to establish the grounds of the application or probable cause for believing that they exist. “(e) If the judge or commissioner is thereupon satisfied of the existence of the grounds of the application or that there is probable cause to believe their existence, he must issue a search warrant * * * stating the particular grounds or probable cause for its is-gue * * (Emphasis added.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““If the peace officer has reason to believe and does believe that a search or seizure ought to be made, he should state in his affidavit the facts which led him to that conclusion, and which were known to him of his own knowledge. If he has no first-hand information as to the material facts, but has been informed by another as to facts or conditions which would justify the issuance of process for search or seizure, the officer should secure the informer’s affidavit positively alleging of the latter’s own knowledge the existence of such facts or conditions. In the event that the informer is unwilling to make such an affidavit, he should be subpoenaed to appear before the judge or commissioner to give testimony as to the truth of the statements made by him to the officer.” 55 App. D.C. at page 85 , 2 F.2d at page 186 . (Emphasis supplied.)”
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.