Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 324 F.2d 115 - United States v. Burrell

United States v. Burrell’s Empirical Analysis

324 F.2d 115 · 1963

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
2
states following
June 1979
most recently cited

16 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Pereira v. United States · Gori v. United States · Ingram v. United States · United States v. Santore · United States v. Sferas

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

  1. ““Appellant Davis urges the defense of illegal search and seizure, but . Davis . . . [did not see] fit to move to suppress the seized evidence on these grounds either at or before the trial. None of the appellants objected to the introduction of the seized materials on the ground that their constitutional rights had been violated. We, therefore, do not consider this point.” United States v. Burrell, 324 F.2d 115 , 119 (7th Cir. 1963), cert, denied, 376 U.S. 937 , 84 S.Ct. 791 , 11 L.Ed.2d 657 (1964).”
    2 later decisions 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.