United States v. Pappas’s Empirical Analysis
613 F.2d 324 · 1979
Citation profile
33 federal appellate · 17 district · 11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 88 later decisions — most recently December 2016 · most notably United States v. $38,000.00 in United States Currency (1987), United States v. Pace (1990)
33 federal appellate · 17 district · 11 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.
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 881 (§ 511 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on South Dakota v. Opperman · Cady v. Dombrowski · Richards v. United States · Rosado v. Wyman · Cooper v. State of California
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 88 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(4) the Attorney General has probable cause to believe that the property has been used or is intended to be used in violation of this subchapter.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“justifying the warrantless seizure of an automobile only when the seizure immediately follows the occurrence that gives the federal agents probable cause to believe that the automobile is subject to forfeiture under section 881(a) and the exigencies of the surrounding circumstances make the requirement of obtaining process unreasonable or unnecessary.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“whether the statute [Section 881] authorizes a warrantless seizure when the events providing the probable cause are remote in time from the actual seizure of the property and no exigent circumstances necessitate prompt action.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.