Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 985 F.2d 607 - United States v. Gomez-Benabe

United States v. Gomez-Benabe’s Empirical Analysis

985 F.2d 607 · 1993

Citation profile

24
cited by 24 later decisions
2
states following
August 2010
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently August 2010

13 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

200199320002010decided

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 Jones v. United States · Nardone v. United States · United States v. Barletta · United States v. Mendoza-Acevedo · United States v. Gomez

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

  1. “Failure by a party to raise defenses or objections ... which must be made prior to trial ... shall constitute waiver thereof.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “police conduct not immediately relevant to the question of guilt.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “At least as used in 12(b), “suppress” has a rather definite and limited meaning, as explained by the Advisory Committee notes accompanying the Rule. Motions to suppress are described as “objections to evidence on the ground that it was illegally obtained”, including “evidence obtained as a result of an illegal search” and “other forms of illegality such as the use of unconstitutional means to obtain a confession.” Put generally, then, suppression motions concern the “application of the exclusionary rule of evidence’, or matters of “ ‘police conduct not immediately relevant to the question of guilt”....”
    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.