Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 576 F.2d 749 - United States v. Michael C. Jackson, United States of America v. Salvatore (Sam) Pellitieri

United States v. Michael C. Jackson, United States of America v. Salvatore (Sam) Pellitieri’s Empirical Analysis

576 F.2d 749 · 1978

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
6
states following
April 2005
most recently cited

33 federal appellate · 1 district · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently April 2005 · most notably Commonwealth v. Young (1981), United States v. Bradford S. Taylor, United States of America v. Vincent Carmen Pinto (1986)

33 federal appellate · 1 district · 7 state decisions

3101978198019902000decided

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 Chapman v. State of California · Chimel v. California · Coolidge v. New Hampshire · Harrington v. California · Sedillo 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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Although the file drawer and the brief case that the agent seized were perhaps in plain view, the contents of each were not. The plain view doctrine does not authorize search and seizure of items contained within objects like attache cases, file cabinets, and luggage that are themselves in `plain view' . . . It [the plain view doctrine] cannot be used as justification for rummaging through file cabinets, even with probable cause to believe that incriminating evidence lies within. . .”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the area from within which [the suspect] might gain possession of a weapon or destructible evidence,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “instrument or document or writing evidencing ownership of goods, wares, and merchandise.”
    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.