Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 21 F.3d 165 - United States v. Jones

United States v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis

21 F.3d 165 · 1994

Citation profile

84
cited by 84 later decisions
3
states following
May 2025
most recently cited

66 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 84 later decisions — most recently May 2025 · most notably United States v. Ross (1996), 9 Cal. 4th 824 - People v. Stansbury (1995)

66 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

7301994200020102020decided

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

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1956 (§ 1352 of the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 26 U.S.C. § 5861 (§ 201 of the Gun Control Act of 1968) · 26 U.S.C. § 7201 · 31 U.S.C. § 5313

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · United States v. Olano · Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · Berkemer v. McCarty · Griffith v. Kentucky

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

  1. ““In determining whether the accused was subjected to custodial interrogation, a reviewing court should consider the totality of the circumstances. The accused’s freedom to leave the scene and the purpose, place and length of interrogation are all relevant factors in making this determination. U.S. v. Jones, 21 F.3d 165, 170 (7th Cir.1994), quoting U.S. v. Hocking, 860 F.2d 769, 773 (7th Cir.1988).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Plain errors or defects affecting substantial rights may be noticed although they were not brought to the attention of the court.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Miranda warnings are not required merely because the individual questioned by law enforcement officers is a suspect or is the focus of a criminal investigation.”
    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.