Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 491 F.2d 1323 - Wallis v. O'Kier

Wallis v. O'Kier’s Empirical Analysis

491 F.2d 1323 · 1974

Citation profile

37
cited by 37 later decisions
5
states following
October 2015
most recently cited

16 federal appellate · 4 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently October 2015 · most notably United States v. Chapman (1992), United States v. Banks (1976)

16 federal appellate · 4 district · 6 state decisions

15019741980199020002010decided

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

Relies on Coolidge v. New Hampshire · Sedillo v. United States · Shadwick v. City of Tampa · Amalgamated Ass'n of Street, Electric Railway & Motor Coach Employees v. Lockridge · Kennedy v. Commandant, United States Disciplinary Barracks

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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “. It has not been shown, and the Court will not assume, that the Commanding Officer of a military installation is to be classified as a prosecutor or a policeman. We think he is neither. He is of the description given him by his title— the Commanding Officer of the personnel within his command and of the property committed to his control. To be sure, he is responsible for the maintenance of order and discipline within his command. This does not mean that he is partial, prejudiced and biased. There is no reason to suppose that he would be less willing than a magistrate that there be a fair and just administration of the law.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “It is apparent that the omission of a reference to oath or affirmation was deliberate and intentional. There are reasons for such an inference. Although this was probably not such a case, many situations have existed and will exist in military commands where the formalizing of the probable cause by the affixing of a seal to a paper writing would be impractical or impossible. Such a construction has been placed upon the provision by the military courts. 491 F.2d at 1325 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the constitutional courts of the United States have the power and are under the duty to make inquiry.”
    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.