United States v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
626 F.2d 753 · 1980
Citation profile
76 federal appellate · 8 district · 28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 139 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2024 · most notably United States v. Johnson (1982), Elder Holloway et al (1994)
76 federal appellate · 8 district · 28 state decisions — followed in 15 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.
Appellate journey
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1703 · 18 U.S.C. § 2
Relies on Wong Sun v. United States · Payton v. New York · Brown v. Illinois · Sibron v. State of New York Peters · Dunaway v. New York
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 139 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“it is the location of the arrested person, and not the arresting agents, that determines whether an arrest occurs within a home.”
15 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“whether or not the defendant was free to choose between terminating or continuing the encounter with law enforcement officers.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“But this position, it is submitted, is unsound from the standpoint of both principle and pragmatism. For one thing, it is certainly contrary to the language of Payton which, again, merely says that the "threshold may not reasonably be crossed without a warrant.” ... Secondly, this position is contrary to the rationale of Payton .... [T]he warrant requirement makes sense only in terms of the entry, rather than the arrest; the arrest itself is no more threatening or humiliating than a street arrest. This certainly means that if the arrest can be accomplished without entry, it should be deemed lawful notwithstanding the absence of a warrant, even if the arrestee was just inside rather than on the threshold at the time.”
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.