Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 509 F.2d 760 - Weeks v. Estelle

Weeks v. Estelle’s Empirical Analysis

509 F.2d 760 · 1975

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
4
states following
December 2011
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently December 2011

13 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

15019751980199020002010decided

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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · Carroll v. United States · Aguilar v. Texas · Spinelli 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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Secondly, less detailed information from a reliable source may be used as grounds for a finding of probable cause if independent investigation by law enforcement agencies yields sufficient verification or corroboration of the informant’s report to make it ‘apparent that the informant had not been fabricating his report out of whole cloth.’ Spinelli v. United States, supra. “If sufficient corroborative evidence can be collected to support a clear inference that the informer was generally trustworthy, then Aguilar’s second requirement is met.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Whiteley (supra) emphasized that where the government seeks to corroborate an otherwise insufficient informer’s tip on the basis of an independent police investigation, it has to show that information acquired through the investigation tends to indicate that the defendant is in the process of committing, or has previously committed, a crime.””
    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.