United States v. Bazinet’s Empirical Analysis
462 F.2d 982 · 1972
Citation profile
36 federal appellate · 4 district · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2004 · most notably United States v. Watson (1975), United States v. McCaleb (1977)
36 federal appellate · 4 district · 10 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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. § 371
Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Wong Sun v. United States · Coolidge v. New Hampshire · Johnson v. United States · Sedillo 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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An inference of participation in conspiracy does not seem to be sustained by the facts peculiar to this case. The argument that one who “accompanies a criminal to a crime rendezvous” cannot be assumed to be a bystander, forceful enough in some circumstances, is farfetched when the meeting is not secretive or in a suspicious hide-out but in broad daylight, in plain sight of passersby, in a public street of a large city, and where the alleged substantive crime is one which does not necessarily involve any act visibly criminal . . . Presumptions of guilt are not lightly to be indulged in from mere meetings.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Consent “must be proved by ‘clear and positive testimony,’ Amos v. United States, 255 U.S. 313 , 41 S.Ct. 266 , 65 L.Ed. 654 (1921), and ‘must be unequivocal, specific and intelligently given, uncontaminated by any duress or coercion,’ Simmons v. Bomar, 349 F.2d 365 (6th Cir. 1965).” United States v. Hearn, supra, 496 F.2d at 244 . “[T]he mere fact that a person has been arrested in violation of his constitutional rights casts grave doubt upon the voluntariness of a subsequent consent. The Government has a heavy burden of proof in establishing that the consent was the voluntary act of the arrestee and that it was not the fruit of the illegal arrest.” United States v. Bazinet, 462 F.2d 982 , 989-90 (8th Cir.), cert. de nied, 409 U.S. 1010 , 93 S.Ct. 453 , 34 L.Ed.2d 303 (1972); see also, Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 , 83 S.Ct. 407 , 9 L.Ed.2d 441 (1963); Manning v. Jarnigan, supra, 501 F.2d at 411-412 . United States v. McCaleb, supra at 721 (footnote omitted).”
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.