Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 480 F.2d 1217 - United States v. Miles

United States v. Miles’s Empirical Analysis

480 F.2d 1217 · 1973

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
4
states following
July 2010
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently July 2010

7 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions

6019731980199020002010decided

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 26 U.S.C. § 5861 (§ 201 of the Gun Control Act of 1968)

Relies on Coolidge v. New Hampshire · Sedillo v. United States · United States v. Davis · George L. Downing, William H. Merrill v. Robert L. Kunzig · Sartain 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The defendant was employed as a driver’s helper on a United Van Lines moving van which was being loaded with household goods at an army base. While the defendant and another helper remained at the residence packing more household goods, the driver took the van to another part of the base to have it weighed. Because the truck scale was located in a restricted area, security guards told the driver the truck would have to be searched; the driver consented, and thereafter specifically agreed to the opening of a suitcase the guards found in the passenger section of the van. Only when a sawed-off shotgun was discovered in the suitcase did the driver advise the guards that the case belonged to his helper. The court, in upholding the search, quite properly viewed the issue as being whether the guard had reason to believe the driver was consenting to search of his own property, rather than whether the defendant had assumed the risk.”
    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.