Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 445 F.2d 1100 - United States v. Ortiz

United States v. Ortiz’s Empirical Analysis

445 F.2d 1100 · 1971

Citation profile

91
cited by 91 later decisions
11
states following
December 2005
most recently cited

67 federal appellate · 5 district · 15 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 91 later decisions — most recently December 2005 · most notably People v. Bennett (1973), United States v. Ramos (1991)

67 federal appellate · 5 district · 15 state decisions — followed in 11 states

5401971198019902000decided

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 · 21 U.S.C. § 331 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)

Relies on McClure v. United States · Stevan v. Union Trust Co. of District of Columbia · United States v. Chambers · Masiello 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 91 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “must be 'substantial; that is, it must do more than raise a mere suspicion of guilt.'”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[t]he evidence--both direct and circumstantial, together with the reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom--is sufficient if, when taken in the light most favorable to the government, a reasonable jury could find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[r]arely if ever is there an affirmative refusal. More often the officers meet with silence as the occupants seek to destroy evidence or escape.”
    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.