Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 448 F.2d 963 - United States v. Jackson

United States v. Jackson’s Empirical Analysis

448 F.2d 963 · 1971

Citation profile

86
cited by 86 later decisions
18
states following
October 2007
most recently cited

52 federal appellate · 4 district · 24 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 86 later decisions — most recently October 2007 · most notably United States v. Ferguson (1985), United States v. Murray (1973)

52 federal appellate · 4 district · 24 state decisions — followed in 18 states

6201971198019902000decided

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. § 2113 · 18 U.S.C. § 3

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Terry v. Ohio · Wong Sun v. United States · Katz v. United States · United States v. Wade

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

  1. ““The other items seized at the motel and later received in evidence were taken from a trash can outside Rooms 19 and 20. What a person knowingly exposes to the public is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection. Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 351 , 88 S.Ct. 507 , 19 L.Ed.2d 576 (1967). When defendants placed articles in this public trash can outside the room, they surrendered their privacy with regard to those articles. See United States v. Minker, 312 F.2d 632, 634 (3rd Cir. 1962). See also, Wattenburg v. United States, 388 F.2d 853, 857 (9th Cir. 1968).” United States v. Jackson, 448 F.2d 963, 971 (9th Cir. 1971).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “"Under these facts the officers acted reasonably in stopping the Cadillac and questioning the occupants concerning their identity and residences. This was intelligent, effective police work. If police officers may not do what was done here, law enforcement would be seriously crippled. The Fourth Amendment was not intended to handcuff the police in their reasonable effort to handcuff criminals. [Citations omitted.]" 448 F.2d, at 970 . (Emphasis supplied.)”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““the inadvertent confrontation prior to the suppression hearing was less suggestive than the ‘stand-up’ procedure followed, in the presence of counsel and without objection, at the suppression hearing and the subsequent trial.” 448 F.2d at 967 .”
    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.