Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 955 F.2d 156 - Mora v. United States

Mora v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

955 F.2d 156 · 1992

Citation profile

116
cited by 116 later decisions
6
states following
June 2023
most recently cited

49 federal appellate · 3 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 116 later decisions — most recently June 2023 · most notably Lee v. City of Chicago (2003), Onwubiko v. United States (1992)

49 federal appellate · 3 district · 6 state decisions

5701992200020102020decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 2401 · 28 U.S.C. § 2671 · 28 U.S.C. § 2675 · 28 U.S.C. § 2680

Relies on Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody · United States v. Martinson · United States v. Wilson · United States v. Francis

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

  1. “A person aggrieved by an unlawful search and seizure may move the district court for the district in which the property was seized for the return of the property on the ground that he is entitled to lawful possession of the property which was illegally seized. The judge shall receive evidence on any issue of fact necessaiy to the decision of the motion. If the motion is granted the property shall be restored and it shall not be admissible in evidence at any hearing or trial. If a motion for return of property is made or comes on for hearing in the district of trial after an indictment or information is filed, it shall be treated also as a motion to suppress under Rule 12.”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[a]n argument could be made that Bein essentially attempts to overrule Chambers. " Albinson, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 374, at n. 9, 2001 WL 43779, at . 8 Department of Justice regulations require the FBI to maintain detailed chain of custody records for all seized property See, e.g., 41 C.F.R. § 128-50.101 ("Each bureau shall be responsible for establishing and maintaining inventory records of its seized personal property to ensure that ... (d) A well documented chain of custody is kept; and (e) All information in the inventory records is accurate and current.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “'Where a court of equity assumes jurisdiction because the complaint requires equitable relief, the court has power to award damages incident to the complaint.'”
    3 later decisions 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.