Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 435 F.2d 766 - United States v. Case

United States v. Case’s Empirical Analysis

435 F.2d 766 · 1970

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
8
states following
March 2016
most recently cited

23 federal appellate · 16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently March 2016 · most notably 9 Cal. 3d 626 - Lorenzana v. Superior Court (1973), United States v. Jefferson (1983)

23 federal appellate · 16 state decisions

29019701980199020002010decided

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

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3109

Relies on Wong Sun v. United States · Katz v. United States · Chimel v. California · Johnson v. United States · Ker v. State of California

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

  1. “Llanes , however, is based upon the finding that the hallway was a public place and that the defendants could hardly expect conversations audible to someone in a public place to be regarded as private. On the contrary, the district judge in this case found that the hallway “ * * * was not such a public area as to entitle the Court to consider it a non-protected area” and we concur. . [ 435 F.2d at 768 .]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “§ 3109. Breaking doors or windows for entry or exit The officer may break open any outer or inner door or window of a house, or any part of a house, or anything therein, to execute a search warrant, if, after notice of his authority and purpose, he is refused admittance or when necessary to liberate himself or a person aiding him in the execution of the warrant.”
    1 later decision 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.