Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 492 F.2d 480 - Robert Fixel v. Louie L. Wainwright

Robert Fixel v. Louie L. Wainwright’s Empirical Analysis

492 F.2d 480 · 1974

Citation profile

66
cited by 66 later decisions
13
states following
August 2023
most recently cited

25 federal appellate · 2 district · 26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 66 later decisions — most recently August 2023 · most notably United States v. Hensel (1983), United States v. Jackson (1979)

25 federal appellate · 2 district · 26 state decisions — followed in 13 states

220197419801990200020102020decided

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 Wong Sun v. United States · Katz v. United States · Carroll v. United States · Brinegar v. United States · Chimel v. California

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

  1. “The limits on the doctrine are implicit in the statement of its rationale. The first of these is that plain view alone is never enough to justify the warrantless seizure of evidence. This is simply a corollary of the familiar principle discussed above, that no amount of probable cause can justify a warrantless search or seizure absent "exigent circumstances." Incontrovertible testimony of the senses that an incriminating object is on premises belonging to a criminal suspect may establish the fullest possible measure of probable cause. But even where the object is contraband, this Court has repeatedly stated and enforced the basic rule that the police may not enter and make a warrantless seizure.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “"... While the enjoyment of his backyard is not as exclusive as the backyard of a purely private residence, this area is not as public or shared as the corridors, yards or other common areas of a large apartment complex or motel. Contemporary concepts of living such as multi-unit dwellings must not dilute Fixel's right to privacy any more than is absolutely required. We believe that the backyard area of Fixel's home is sufficiently removed and private in character that he could reasonably expect privacy. .. ." (Emphasis added.) 492 F.2d at 484 .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The sacredness of a person’s home and the right of personal privacy and individuality are paramount considerations of our country and are specifically protected by the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment’s protection, however, extends further than just the walls of the physical structure of the home itself. The area immediately surrounding and closely related to the dwelling is also entitled to the Fourth Amendment’s protection. Fi xel v. Wainwright, 492 F.2d 480, at 483 (5th Cir. 1974).”
    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.