United States v. United States Currency in the Amount of One Hundred Forty-Five Thousand, One Hundred Thirty-Nine Dollars’s Empirical Analysis
18 F.3d 73 · 1994
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2022 · most notably United States v. Bajakajian (1998), Schroeder v. Com., Dept. of Transp. (1998)
20 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 state decisions
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 15 U.S.C. § 78F (§ 6 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78P (§ 16 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 18 U.S.C. § 1963 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 3572 · 31 U.S.C. § 5316 · 31 U.S.C. § 5317 · 31 U.S.C. § 5321 · 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (§ 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Barker v. Wingo · Bell v. Wolfish · Chimel v. California · United States v. United Mine Workers of America · United States v. Rabinowitz
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]f a report required under section 5316 with respect to any monetary instrument is not filed (or if filed, contains a material omission or misstatement of fact), the instrument and any interest in property, including a deposit in a financial institution, traceable to such instrument may be seized and forfeited to the United States Government.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[A] forfeiture under § 5317 primarily visits retribution on the transporter of the funds for not having supplied the desired information, and acts as a potential deterrent.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“the offense [wa]s not doing something but doing nothing.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.