United States v. Manbeck’s Empirical Analysis
744 F.2d 360 · 1984
Citation profile
129 federal appellate · 11 district · 24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 271 later decisions — most recently February 2024 · most notably United States v. Rusher (1992), 67 Ohio St. 3d 405 - State v. Evans (1993)
129 federal appellate · 11 district · 24 state decisions — followed in 13 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 14 U.S.C. § 89 · 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 19 U.S.C. § 1581 (Tariff Act of 1930) · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 951 (Controlled Substances Import and Export Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 952 · 21 U.S.C. § 963
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Terry v. Ohio · Illinois v. Gates · Glasser v. United States · Wong Sun 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 271 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“at the time the arrest occurs, the facts and circumstances within the officer's knowledge would warrant the belief of a prudent person that the arrestee had committed or was committing an offense.”
14 later decisions quote this exact passage“... uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice may be sufficient to sustain a conviction.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage“'[M]ere knowledge, acquiescence or approval without cooperation or agreement to cooperate is not enough to constitute one part of a conspiracy.'”
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.