Harris v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
331 U.S. 145 · 1947
Citation profile
1,176 federal appellate · 144 district · 1,081 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 3,000 later decisions (163 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2025 · most notably United States v. Leon (1984), Chimel v. California (1969)
1,176 federal appellate · 144 district · 1,081 state decisions — followed in 48 states
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. A case is still cited after being overruled — to note the reversal, distinguish it, or in dissent. 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Carroll v. United States · Boyd v. United States · Weeks v. United States · Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States · Olmstead v. United States
Cited together with United States v. Rabinowitz · Carroll v. United States · Agnello v. United States · Chimel v. California · Weeks 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 3,000 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
92 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The requirement that warrants shall particularly describe the things to be seized makes general searches under them impossible and prevents the seizure of one thing under a warrant describing another. As to what is to be taken, nothing is left to the discretion of the officer executing the warrant.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[T]he forefathers thought this was not too great a price to pay for that decent privacy of home, papers and effects which is indispensable to individual dignity and self-respect. They may have overvalued privacy, but I am not disposed to set their command at naught.”
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.