Lochnane v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 1 district ·

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

1. ““It is not enough that the form of this affidavit leaves it possible that the affiant might have personal knowledge as to the possession of intoxicating liquor and as to facts tending to show that such possession was illegal. It should have affirmatively appeared that he had personal knowledge of facts competent for a jury to consider, and the facts, and not his conclusion from the facts, should have been before the commissioner.” Lochname v. U. S., 9 Cir, 2 F.2d 427 ; Kohler v. U. S., 9 Cir, 9 F.2d 23 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Sands · 147 F. Supp. 944 - United States v. Lassoff

2. ““We are of opinion that the mere sworn general statements that a proprietor of a hotel at a certain place is unlawfully possessed of intoxicating liquor for beverage purposes, or is transporting or selling the same, is not sufficient to warrant a judicial finding of probable cause for the issuance of a search warrant which directs a search of the hotel named.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Sands