United States v. Capra’s Empirical Analysis
501 F.2d 267 · 1974
Citation profile
73 federal appellate · 10 district · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 133 later decisions — most recently March 2021 · most notably State v. Piskorski (1979), United States v. Turner (1975)
73 federal appellate · 10 district · 12 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 18 U.S.C. § 2510 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2518 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 21 U.S.C. § 812 (§ 202 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 881 (§ 511 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 26 U.S.C. § 7237
Relies on Wong Sun v. United States · Katz v. United States · Carroll v. United States · Kotteakos v. United States · Simmons 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 133 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“when police are merely assisting a private party, who has authority to search and a legitimate need to do so, ... courts are reluctant to exclude resulting evidence”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[i]f agents have probable cause to believe that a car is or has been used for carrying contraband, they may summarily seize it . and search it.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Where defendants, through the use of front money and baggage checks, have exerted such efforts to insulate themselves from personal possession of [contraband], they are hardly in a position to object that they have been “hoist with their own petard.” None of the defendants was able to prove that his reasonable expectations of privacy were infringed by the search of the suitcase.”
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.