Timothy Mcgann v. Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Railroad Corporation’s Empirical Analysis
8 F.3d 1174 · 1994
Citation profile
29 federal appellate · 1 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 68 later decisions — most recently March 2017 · most notably Waldridge v. American Hoechst Corp. (1994), United States of America v. Ronald Woodrum (2000)
29 federal appellate · 1 district · 7 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 Terry v. Ohio · Wong Sun v. United States · Katz v. United States · Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · Coolidge v. New Hampshire
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 68 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Generally, in deciding whether to uphold a warrantless search on the basis of implied consent, courts consider whether (1) the person searched was on notice that undertaking certain conduct, like attempting to enter a building or board an airplane, would subject him to search, (2) the person voluntarily engaged in the specified conduct, (3) the search was justified by a ‘vital interest’, (4) the search was reasonably effective in securing the interests at stake, (5) the search was only as intrusive as necessary to further the interests justifying the search, and (6) the search curtailed, to some extent, unbridled discretion in the searching officers ... these factors should be examined carefully in each case in evaluating the totality of the circumstances ...””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Government agents may not obtain consent to search on the representation that they intend to look only for certain specified items and subsequently use that consent as a license to conduct a general exploratory search. A consent search is reasonable only if kept within the bounds of the actual consent.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[w]hen statements and conduct evidencing consent to a search are given contemporaneously with the illegal seizure, with no break in the causal chain, the actions of the person seized are not free from the taint of unlawful detention and are thus insufficient to show consent.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. In Re JF
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.