Bennett v. Texas, 525 U.S. 1086 (1999).

Bennett v. Texas, 525 U.S. 1086 (1999). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite

green Positive treatment Quoted verbatim 1× 7.9 score

G Cite

cited 5× by 3 distinct cases · "The Fourth Amendment's 'knock and announce' principle, given its fact-sensitive nature, cannot be distilled into a constitutional stop-watch where a fraction of a second assumes controlling significance."

45 citation events (31 in the last 25 years) across 11 distinct courts.

Strongest positive: United States v. Kip R. Jones (ca7, 2000-05-26)

Treatment trajectory · 2000 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of

2000 2013 2026

Top citers, strongest first. 13 distinct citers. How cited ↗

examined Cited as authority (quoted) United States v. Kip R. Jones

7th Cir. · 2000 · signal: see, e.g. · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low

the fourth amendment's 'knock and announce' principle, given its fact-sensitive nature, cannot be distilled into a constitutional stop-watch where a fraction of a second assumes controlling significance.

discussed Cited "see" State v. Cassel

Ohio Ct. App. · 2016 · signal: see · confidence high

See United States v. Spikes (C.A. 6, 1998), 158 F.3d 913 , certiorari denied (1999), 525 U.S. 1086 , 119 S.Ct. 836 , 142 L.Ed.2d 692 . *** “To successfully attack the veracity of a facially sufficient search- warrant affidavit, a defendant must show by a preponderance of the evidence that the affiant made a false statement, either ‘intentionally, or with reckless disregard for the truth.’ ” State v. McKnight, 107 Ohio St.3d 101 , -11- 2005-Ohio-6046 , 837 N.E.2d 315, at ¶ 31 , quoting Franks v. Delaware (1978), 438 U.S. 154, 155-156 , 98 S.Ct. 2674 , 57 L.Ed.2d 667 .

discussed Cited "see" United States v. Edwards

D. Minnesota · 2008 · signal: see · confidence high

See United States v. Liu, 180 F.3d 957, 960 (8th Cir.1999) (citing United States v. Landry, 154 F.3d 897, 899 (8th Cir.1998), cert. denied, 525 U.S. 1086 , 119 S.Ct. 836 , 142 L.Ed.2d 692 (1999)); see also Segars, 31 F.3d at 658 (“An expectation of privacy is a question of intent, which ‘may be inferred from words spoken, acts done and other objective facts.’ ”) (citations omitted).

discussed Cited "see" United States v. Miller

6th Cir. · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high

See United States v. Spikes, 158 F.3d 913, 925-27 (6th Cir.1998), cert. denied, 525 U.S. 1086 , 119 S.Ct. 836 , 142 L.Ed.2d 692 (1999) (holding fifteen to thirty seconds sufficient); United States v. Gatewood, 60 F.3d 248, 250 (6th Cir.1995), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 1001 , 116 S.Ct. 546 , 133 L.Ed.2d 448 (1995) (ten seconds sufficient); see also United States v. Jones, 133 F.3d 358, 362 (5th Cir.1998), cert. denied 523 U.S. 1144 , 118 S.Ct. 1854 , 140 L.Ed.2d 1102 (1998) (fifteen to twenty seconds sufficient); United States v. Knapp, 1 F.3d 1026, 1030-31 (10th Cir.1993) (ten to twelve seconds s…

cited Cited "see" United States v. Goode