Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 425 U.S. 484 - Hampton v. United States

Hampton v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

1976

Citation profile

2,306
cited by 2,306 later decisions
13
cited 13 times by the Supreme Court
42
states following
July 2025
most recently cited

1,308 federal appellate · 64 district · 506 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 2,306 later decisions (13 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2025 · most notably United States v. Hasting (1983), United States v. Scott (1978)

1,308 federal appellate · 64 district · 506 state decisions — followed in 42 states

9960197619801990200020102020decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedUnited States v. Hampton (from Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Imbler v. Pachtman · Rochin v. People of California · O'Shea v. Littleton · United States v. Russell · Sorrells v. United States

Cited together with United States v. Russell · Sorrells v. United States · Sherman v. United States · Rochin v. People of California · United States v. Twigg

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 2,306 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “'that fundamental fairness, shocking to the universal sense of justice,' mandated by the due process clause of the fifth amendment.”
    58 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “so outrageous that due process principles would absolutely bar the government from invoking judicial processes to obtain a conviction”
    36 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Police overinvolvement in crime would have to reach a demonstrable level of outrageousness before it could bar conviction.”
    35 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.