Maxwell v. Stephens’s Empirical Analysis
348 F.2d 325 · 1965
Citation profile
59 federal appellate · 5 district · 39 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 120 later decisions — most recently May 2003 · most notably United States v. Peterson (1975), McCreary v. Sigler (1969)
59 federal appellate · 5 district · 39 state decisions — followed in 26 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 Wong Sun v. United States · Mapp v. Ohio · Aguilar v. Texas · Jones v. United States · Fay v. Noia
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 120 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Defendant’s argument that his coat cannot be seized without his consent] overlooks the consent to the officers’ acquisition of the coat by a person having the proprietary interest of the premises where it was. * * * It was an item which freely came into the hands of the authorities by one who had the right to make it available to them. * * * The situation therefore appears to us to be one not involving any unreasonable search or seizure within the prohibition of the Fourth, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. Reasonableness, after all, is the applicable standard.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent““ * * * [A] consent freely and intelligently given by the proper person may operate to eliminate any question otherwise existing as to the propriety of a search”.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“"Neither are we impressed with any suggestion that the testimonial references to the coat were in any way a further violation of Maxwell's right not to be compelled physically to be a witness against himself, within the meaning of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. The description of the coat and what was found on it was objective evidence from the mouths of witnesses who saw or who investigated. The coat is in no different category than the contours of Maxwell's face, the color of his hair, the description and the nature and condition of the clothes he wore, and his very size and color. (Citations Omitted)" Maxwell v. Stephens, 348 F.2d 325, 338 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Hubbard v. State
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.