United States v. Pimental’s Empirical Analysis
645 F.2d 85 · 1981
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 5 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently July 2016 · most notably United States v. Akitoye (1991), United States v. Nolan (1983)
15 federal appellate · 5 district · 4 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
Relies on Wong Sun v. United States · Brown v. Illinois · Brown v. Texas · Johnson v. Louisiana · Amato v. Wisconsin
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“This fact-specific inquiry should take account of ‘[t]he temporal proximity of the arrest and [the discovery of the illegal (sic) evidence], the presence of intervening circumstances ... and particularly, the purpose and flagrancy of the official misconduct.... ’”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“granting establishment of the primary illegality, the evidence to which instant objection is made has been come at by exploitation of that illegality or instead by means sufficiently distinguishable to be purged of the primary taint.”
1 later decision 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.