Ray v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
84 F.2d 654 · 1936
Citation profile
21 federal appellate · 4 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently November 1969 · most notably 45 Cal. 2d 776 - People v. Gorg (1955), Judd v. United States (1951)
21 federal appellate · 4 district · 6 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 Agnello v. United States · United States v. Lefkowitz · Go-Bart Importing Co. v. United States · Byars v. United States · Amos 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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * whatever justification for seizing an automobile without a warrant may be spelled out of its fugitive and ambulatory abilities, none may be advanced to excuse the •compulsory search of and seizure in a private home without one. ‘While the question has never been directly •decided by this court, it has always been assumed that one’s house cannot lawfully be searched without a search warrant, except as an incident to a lawful arrest therein. * * * The protection of the Fourth Amendment extends to all equally— to those justly suspected or accused, as well as to the innocent. The search of a private dwelling without a warrant is in itself unreasonable and abhorrent to our laws. Congress has never passed an act purporting to authorize the search of a house without a warrant.’ Agnello v. United States, 269 U.S. 20 , 32, 46 S.Ct. 4 , 6, 70 L.Ed. 145 , 51 A.L.R. 409 ; cf. Nathanson v. United States, 290 U.S. 41 , 54 S.Ct. 11 , 78 L.Ed. 159 . In respect of homes the constitutional provision against unreasonable searches and seizures may not be relaxed to find volitional, acts which the evidence leaves no doubt were, if not expressly, impliedly coerced. Amos v. United States, 255 U.S. 313 , 41 S.Ct. 266 , 65 L.Ed. 654 .” (Emphasis supplied.)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““We think it will not do to say under the circumstances disclosed by this record, that there was a real volition in appellant’s taking the officers to his home and revealing its contents to them. The consent which opens the doors of a private home to official search and seizure cannot be deemed voluntary unless it be made clearly to appear that it was freely and intelligently given, not expressly or impliedly coerced.” (Ray v. United States, 5 Cir. 1936, 84 F.2d 654, 656 ).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Armwood v. Pepersack
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.