Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 21 F.3d 847 - United States v. Olson

United States v. Olson’s Empirical Analysis

21 F.3d 847 · 1994

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
2
states following
July 2020
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently July 2020 · most notably United States v. Cusumano (1996), United States v. Ishmael (1995)

14 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions

1301994200020102020decided

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. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)

Relies on Illinois v. Gates · 123 Wash. 2d 173 - State v. Young · United States v. Kerr · United States v. Broussard · United States v. Deaner

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

  1. “In [Illinois v.] Gates, the Supreme Court explained that an informant’s reliability and basis of knowledge “are better understood as relevant considerations in the totality-of-the-circumstances analysis that traditionally has guided probable-cause determinations: a deficiency in one may be compensated for, in determining the overall reliability of a tip, by a strong showing as to the other, or by some other indicia of reliability.” * * * 462 U.S. at 233 , 103 S.Ct. at 2329 .”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[t]he agents verified that there was a mobile home on the farm site where Olson was purportedly living, and that there was no visible agricultural activity or livestock. They also learned that there was what appeared to be a venting system in the roof of the mobile home (apparently used to vent excessive heat). Finally, and perhaps most importantly, they obtained Olson’s electric records which showed abnormally high (three to four times higher than that of the prior owner). All of these facts, although individually consistent with innocence, taken together support a finding of probable cause. The informants’ reliability was further established by the proven track record of one of the two informants, who had provided information in the past that led to numerous drug convictions.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “the photographs revealed rafters on the north side of the mobile home that were visible due to the extreme heat. The agent who reviewed the videotape noted as well that the mobile home appeared to be split into two rooms; the divider wall was visible due to the transfer of heat from the north end of the home into the wall.”
    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.