Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 311 F.2d 721 - United States v. Williams

United States v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

311 F.2d 721 · 1963

Citation profile

39
cited by 39 later decisions
1
states following
March 1983
most recently cited

32 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently March 1983 · most notably United States v. White (1969), United States v. Missler (1969)

32 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

310196319701980decided

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. § 371 · 47 U.S.C. § 605

Relies on Silverman v. United States · Curley v. United States · Rathbun v. United States · Billeci v. United States · Evans 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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““* * * [N]o person not being authorized by the sender shall intercept any communication and divulge or publish the existence, contents, substance, purport, effect, or meaning of such intercepted communication to any person; and no person not being entitled thereto shall receive or assist in receiving any interstate or foreign communication by wire or radio and use the same or any information therein contained for his own benefit or for the benefit of another not entitled thereto * *”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The true rule, therefore, is that a trial judge, in passing upon a motion for directed verdict of acquittal, must determine whether upon the evidence, giving full play to the right of the jury to determine credibility, weigh the evidence, and draw justifiable inferences of fact, a reasonable mind might fairly conclude guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. If he concludes that upon the evidence there must be such a doubt in a reasonable mind, he must grant the motion; . . .”
    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.