United States v. Jamison’s Empirical Analysis
509 F.3d 623 · 2007
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 4 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently March 2023 · most notably United States v. Black (2013), United States v. Davis (2012)
8 federal appellate · 4 district · 8 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Virginia Eastern District Court)
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3731 · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act)
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Florida v. Bostick · Oregon v. Mathiason · Thompson v. Keohane · Cervantes v. Walker
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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Without securing Jamison’s consent, Detective Macer examined Jamison’s injury, partially exposing his genitalia. He found charring and stippling at the entry wound consistent with a shot fired at close range. He further observed a downward trajectory from the entry wound to the exit wound. Finding these facts to be in tension with Jamison’s account of the shooting, Detective Macer then examined Jamison’s clothing and found no bullet holes. Detective Macer again asked Jamison to explain the shooting; Jamison repeated that he was shot while using drugs. When Detective Macer explained that his observations seemed inconsistent with Jamison’s story, Jamison admitted that he shot himself with a handgun and threw the gun away. Detective Macer asked Jamison to reveal the location of the gun so that it could be secured, but Jamison refused, explaining that he was on probation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the restrictions on [a person's] freedom arising from police interrogation and those incident to his background cirenmstances”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Maestas“factors independent of police restraint,”
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.