Drayton v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
205 F.2d 35 · 1953
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 2 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently March 1972 · most notably 45 Cal. 2d 590 - People v. Tarantino (1955), United States v. Bell (1972)
17 federal appellate · 2 district · 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.
Relationships
Relies on Carroll v. United States · Boyd v. United States · Weeks v. United States · United States v. Rabinowitz · United States v. Di Re
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The search here involved transcends even the doctrine of the Harris case, which appears to be the apogee of the Supreme Court decisions on search of a dwelling without a warrant. In the Harris case the other rooms of the apartment were open, readily accessible, and contiguous to the situs of the arrest. Here, room No. 5, in which the contraband was found, was wholly unconnected with the room in which the arrest was made. It was on another floor, and in another part of the building. * * * * ■» * * * * “This search was a general exploratory one, made solely in the hope of finding evidence — any evidence— which might connect the defendant with crime. Apparently, one of the primary purposes of making the arrest was to enable the federal officers to make a general search of the premises without a warrant. Such searches are uniformly condemned by the courts. * * * ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““Although stricter requirements of reasonableness may apply where a dwelling is being searched, compare Davis v. United States, 328 U.S. 582 , (592), 66 S.Ct. 1256 , 90 L.Ed. 1453 ; Matthews v. Correa, 2 Cir., 135 F.2d 534 , 537, * * * ””
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.