United States v. Hatcher’s Empirical Analysis
473 F.2d 321 · 1973
Citation profile
27 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently November 2018 · most notably United States v. Blakeney (1991), United States v. Weaver (1996)
27 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
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 21 U.S.C. § 844 (§ 404 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Carroll v. United States · Sibron v. State of New York Peters · Harris v. United States · Illinois Power Co. v. Local Union No. 51, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers · Kahm 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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We, therefore, reaffirm the requirement that all facts and circumstances relied upon for the issuance of a federal warrant be found in the written affidavit. This ensures that the commissioner may judge for himself the persuasiveness of the precise facts relied on to show probable cause and that the reviewing court may determine whether the constitutional requirements have been met without reliance upon faded and oftén confused memories.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The mere fact that two persons known to have been engaged in trafficking in narcotics were observed on the same premises cannot justify a search of the premises without something more. In this case there was nothing more except the presence of two loaded guns which, absent any allegation of unlawful possession, would form no basis for any search or the issuance of a search warrant.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“25 The text of Rule 41 itself prohibits a Magistrate from considering the kind of evidence which the majority view requires him to consider. Rule 41(c)(1) provides:A warrant ... shall issue only on affidavit or affidavits sworn to before the federal magistrate and establishing the grounds for issuing the warrant. 26 The only exception to this rule is for”
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.