United States v. Workman’s Empirical Analysis
585 F.2d 1205 · 1978
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 2 district · 31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 66 later decisions — most recently December 2006 · most notably Payne v. Robinson (1988), State ex rel. Wright v. Ohio Adult Parole Authority (1996)
24 federal appellate · 2 district · 31 state decisions — followed in 20 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. § 3006A (Criminal Justice Act)
Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · Mapp v. Ohio · Coolidge v. New Hampshire · Gagnon v. Scarpelli
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 66 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the Supreme Court ha[d] never exempted from the operation of the exclusionary rule any adjudicative proceeding in which the government offers unconstitutionally seized evidence in direct support of a charge that may subject the victim of a search to imprisonment,”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“a criminal proceeding that may result in the loss of liberty,”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“"... the special relationship between a parolee and his parole officer and society's interest in close supervision of the parolee serve to lower the standard for determining probable cause to obtain a search warrant but that they do not eliminate the warrant requirement." 585 F.2d at 1207 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Fogarty
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.