Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 449 U.S. 361 - United States v. Morrison

United States v. Morrison’s Empirical Analysis

1981

Citation profile

2,096
cited by 2,096 later decisions
43
cited 43 times by the Supreme Court
47
states following
March 2026
most recently cited

662 federal appellate · 164 district · 699 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 2,096 later decisions (43 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2026 · most notably Strickland v. Washington (1984), United States v. Cronic (1984)

662 federal appellate · 164 district · 699 state decisions — followed in 47 states

683019811990200020102020decided

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. Morrison (from Third Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Glasser v. United States · Johnson v. Zerbst · Gideon v. Wainwright · United States v. Wade

Cited together with Strickland v. Washington · Weatherford v. Bursey · Gideon v. Wainwright · United States v. Cronic · Chapman 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 2,096 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Cases involving Sixth Amendment deprivations are subject to the general rule that remedies should be tailored to the injury suffered from the constitutional violation and should not unnecessarily infringe on competing interests.”
    127 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Even if we assume that the Government did acquire incriminating evidence in violation of the Fifth Amendment, Blue would at most be entitled to suppress the evidence and its fruits if they were sought to be used against him at trial_ Our numerous precedents ordering the exclusion of such illegally obtained evidence assume implicitly that the remedy does not extend to barring the prosecution altogether.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[W]e note that the record before us does not reveal a pattern of recurring violations by investigative officers that might warrant the imposition of a more extreme remedy in order to deter future lawlessness.”
    5 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.