Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 372 F.2d 252 - Thomas v. United States

Thomas v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

372 F.2d 252 · 1967

Citation profile

93
cited by 93 later decisions
4
states following
July 1987
most recently cited

77 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 93 later decisions — most recently July 1987 · most notably United States v. Warner (1971), United States v. Cruz-Valdez (1985)

77 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions

630196719701980decided

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 19 U.S.C. § 482

Relies on Carroll v. United States · Smith v. United States · In re Disbarment of Harris · Alexander v. United States · Marsh 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 93 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Any of the officers or persons authorized to board or search vessels, may stop, search, and examine, as well without as within their respective districts, any vehicle, beast, or person, on which or whom he or they shall suspect there is merchandise which is subject to duty, or shall have been introduced into the United States in any manner contrary to law, whether by the person in possession or charge, or by, in, or upon sueli vehicle or beast, or otherwise, and to search any trunk or envelope, wherever found, in which he may have a reasonable cause to suspect there is merchandise which was imported contrary to law; and if any such officer or other person so authorized shall find any merchandise on or about any such vehicle, beast, or person, or in any such trunk or envelope, which he shall have reasonable cause to believe is subject to duty, or to have been unlawfully introduced into the United States, whether by the person in possession or charge, or by, in, or upon such vehicle, beast, or otherwise, he shall seize and secure the same for trial.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The information in the Thomas case appears in the following quotation from footnote 1: “The informer described a Negro male about 5'6" in height, medium build, with a mustache, wearing a green shirt, a small beany-type cap, and dark trousers.” In the Juarez-Flores case, the customs agents were informed that a shipment of marihuana would be made within a •week from El Paso to New York City by bus; that it would be in one or more large metal suitcases of a certain description ; that the person bringing the suitcases to the bus station would be either a large, strong Mexican man or a smaller Mexican man. The customs agents set up a surveillance at the bus depot. Four days later, Juarez-Flores, a large, strong Mexican man brought two big metal suitcases into the depot and turned them over to the bus agent for shipment by express. The shipping tags showed they were destined for New York City.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““Travelers may be * * * stopped in crossing an international boundary, because of national self-protection reasonably requiring one entering the country to identify himself as entitled to come in, and his belongings as effects which may be lawfully brought in. But those lawfully within the country, entitled to use the public highways, have a right to free passage without interruption or search unless there is known to a competent official, authorized to search, probable cause for believing that their vehicles are carrying contraband or illegal mechandise.””
    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.