United States v. Klein’s Empirical Analysis
565 F.2d 183 · 1977
Citation profile
59 federal appellate · 18 district · 25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 114 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2023 · most notably Groh v. Ramirez (2004), Massachusetts v. Sheppard (1984)
59 federal appellate · 18 district · 25 state decisions — followed in 14 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 17 U.S.C. § 104 (§ 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976)
Relies on Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Spinelli v. United States · Stone v. Powell · Boyd v. United States · Weeks 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 114 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An affidavit may be referred to for purposes of providing particularity if the affidavit accompanies the warrant and the warrant uses suitable words of reference which incorporate the affidavit.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"... A warrant for `stolen', `pirate', or `illegal' goods, be they watches, drugs, clothing, or tapes does not become sufficiently particular by after the fact explanations as to how these products were differentiated from legal merchandise when the seizures were carried out." 565 F.2d at 189 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“certain 8-track electronic tapes and tape cartridges which are unauthorized 'pirate' reproductions.”
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.