United States v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis
3 F.3d 69 · 1993
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 8 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 78 later decisions — most recently June 2021 · most notably United States v. Carpenter (2004), United States v. Frazier (2005)
18 federal appellate · 8 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 18 U.S.C. § 3731
Relies on Illinois v. Gates · United States v. Leon · Franks v. Delaware · Aguilar v. Texas · Spinelli v. United States
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 78 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) [when] the magistrate [judge] issued the warrant in reliance on a deliberately or recklessly false affidavit; (2) [when] the magistrate [judge] abandoned his judicial role and failed to perform his neutral and detached function; (3) [when] the warrant was based on an affidavit ‘so lacking in indicia of probable cause as to render official belief in its existence entirely unreasonable’; or (4) [when] the warrant was so facially deficient that it failed to particularize the place to be searched or the things to be seized.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“is inappropriate when an officer executes a search in objectively reasonable reliance on a warrant's authority.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a single piece of evidence which the law of the stationhouse shop would recognize”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.