United States v. Fluker’s Empirical Analysis
543 F.2d 709 · 1976
Citation profile
57 federal appellate · 2 district · 32 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 105 later decisions — most recently March 2023 · most notably United States v. McConney (1984), United States v. Satterwhite (1992)
57 federal appellate · 2 district · 32 state decisions — followed in 17 states
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. § 3109 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Glasser v. United States · Katz v. United States · Aguilar v. Texas · Spinelli v. United States · Jones 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 105 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘[I]t seems to us a more appropriate test in determining if a search and seizure adjacent to a house is constitutionally forbidden is whether it constitutes an intrusion upon what the resident seeks to preserve as private even in an area which, although adjacent to his home, is accessible to the public. * *”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“considerably more control over access to that portion of the building than would be true in a multi-unit complex, and hence could reasonably be said to have a greater reasonable expectation of privacy than would be true of occupants of large buildings.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The officer may break open any outer or inner door or window of a house, or any part of a house, or anything therein, to execute a search warrant, if, after notice of his authority and purpose, he is refused admittance or when necessary to liberate himself or a person aiding him in the execution of the warrant.””
2 later decisions 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.