United States v. Alberts’s Empirical Analysis
721 F.2d 636 · 1983
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 13 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently January 2019 · most notably United States v. Curry (1990), United States v. Mabry (1987)
15 federal appellate · 13 district · 3 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. § 1163 · 25 U.S.C. § 1302 (§ 202 of the Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968)
Relies on Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · Payton v. New York · Rakas v. Illinois · Bumper v. North Carolina · Rideout 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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“enable the executing officer to locate and identify the premise with reasonable effort, and whether there is any reasonable probability that another premise might be mistakenly searched.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The authority to search granted by any warrant is `limited to the specific places described in it and does not extend to additional or different places.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“A search warrant must contain a description of the place to be searched”
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.