Huff v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 52 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently September 2016 · most notably Johnson v. Commonwealth (2000), 355 So. 2d 1378 - Powell v. State (1978)
3 federal appellate · 52 state decisions — followed in 12 states
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 Aguilar v. Texas · United States v. Ventresca · Draper v. United States · United States v. Harris · SGRO 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.
“It is the oath that solemnizes and verifies. If the affiant is sufficiently identified in the body of the affidavit or in the jurat, his signature is not essential. ..... The magistrate's "certification" that the affidavit was subscribed by the affiant, when it was not, does not taint the verity of the affidavit. The jurat is not a part of the affidavit; it is simply written evidence that probable cause was supported by oath. 3 Am.Jur.2d Affidavits, § 16 (1962). (Emphasis added.) Id., 194 S.E.2d at 692-693 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he commonsense conclusion to be drawn from such facts is that the pattern of criminal practice probably was yet continuing on the date of the affidavit; that drugs would probably continue until the warrant was executed; and that drugs would probably be found at that time in Huff’s residence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“So long as the affidavit remains sufficient to support a finding of probable cause, nothing forbids the issuance of more than one warrant.”
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.