Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
United States v. Johnson, 1971 — 403 U.S. 956 · caselaw · US
Evidence · MBE-tested
United States v. Johnson
403 U.S. 956·Supreme Court of the United States·1971
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
No. 577.
United States v. Johnson.
[MAJORITY]
C. A. 9th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 400 U. S. 990.] Case restored to calendar for reargument. In their briefs and oral arguments, counsel requested to discuss, in addition to question specified, in original petition, the following: “What relevance has the doctrine of Vitarelli v. Seaton, 359 U. S. 535, to the legality of the search in the present case?”