Henzel v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
296 F.2d 650 · 1961
Citation profile
38 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 60 later decisions — most recently July 2023 · most notably United States v. Evans (1978), Harlow v. United States (1962)
38 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 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 Jones v. United States · Silverthorne Lumber Co. 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 60 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““This is not to say that every employee of a corporation can attack the illegal seizure of corporate property if the fruits of the search are proposed to be used against him. Each case must be decided on its own facts. * * * ””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““ * * * anyone legitimately on premises where a search occurs may challenge its legality by way of motion to suppress, when its fruits are proposed to be used against him. * * * ” p. 267, 80 S.Ct. p. 734.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““In Jones, the Supreme Court held that a person accused of possessing narcotics in violation of the Federal Narcotics Laws could attack the Government’s allegedly unlawful seizure of the narcotics even though (a) his presence in the apartment where the narcotics were seized was merely that of a ‘guest’ or ‘invitee,’ and (b) he did not admit to ‘ownership’ of the narcotics. In so holding, the 'Court repudiated the rule which had been adopted by many Courts of Appeals that, in order to qualify as ‘a person aggrieved by an unlawful search and seizure,’ the accused must show ownership or possession of the seized property or a substantial pos-sessory interest in the invaded premises.””
2 later decisions 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.