United States v. Gatewood’s Empirical Analysis
786 F.2d 821 · 1986
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently April 2011 · most notably United States v. Luk (1988), United States v. Alvarez (1987)
24 federal appellate · 1 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 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Illinois v. Gates · Santoni v. United States · 102 S. Ct. 969 - United States v. Security Industrial Bank · Railway Labor Executives' Ass'n v. Gibbons · United States v. Burke
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"We are troubled by the evidence presented in this case. Nonetheless, the issue is whether the district court was properly satisfied that 'in reasonable probability the article has not been changed in any important respect.' While the evidence may raise questions about the handling of the outer packaging in which the four baggies were placed, it does not suggest any real basis for establishing that either the baggies themselves or their contents were different from those in the . . . package originally sent . . . from Denver. In fact, [a co-defendant] identified [the evidence] as the cocaine he sent in the . . . package. Under these circumstances, we cannot say the district court abused its discretion in admitting the cocaine."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to the government, the government is given the benefit of all reasonable inferences, and the verdict will be upheld if there is substantial evidence to support it.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“warrant shall be directed to a civil officer of the United States.”
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.