United States v. Mapp’s Empirical Analysis
476 F.3d 1012 · 2007
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Chimel v. California · Ornelas v. United States · Whren v. United States · New York v. Belton · Michigan v. Long
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“which occurred around ten minutes after [defendant] was arrested, was not 'so separated in time or by intervening events that the [search] cannot be fairly said to have been incident to the [arrest]. "); United States v. Weaver, 433 F.3d 1104 (9th Cir.2006) (search "contemporaneous”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. McGarvey v. State
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.