Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 846 F.2d 279 - United States v. Johnson

United States v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

846 F.2d 279 · 1988

Citation profile

35
cited by 35 later decisions
6
states following
November 2018
most recently cited

17 federal appellate · 3 district · 8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently November 2018 · most notably United States v. Finley (2007), United States v. Morales (1991)

17 federal appellate · 3 district · 8 state decisions

1501988199020002010decided

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. § 1709

Relies on Chimel v. California · New York v. Belton · United States v. Robinson · United States v. Chadwick · United States v. Rosenthal

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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “It seems to have been the theory of the Court of Appeals that the search and seizure in the present case could not have been incident to the respondent’s arrest, because Trooper Nicot, by the very act of searching the respondent’s jacket and seizing the contents of its pocket, had gained “exclusive control” of them_ But under this fallacious theory no search or seizure incident to a lawful custodial arrest would ever be valid; by seizing an article even on the arrestee’s person, an officer may be said to have reduced that article to his “exclusive control.””
    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.