Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 433 U.S. 1 - United States v. Chadwick

United States v. Chadwick’s Empirical Analysis

1977

Citation profile

4,866
cited by 4,866 later decisions
147
cited 147 times by the Supreme Court
47
states following
March 2026
most recently cited

1,596 federal appellate · 209 district · 2,292 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4,866 later decisions (147 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2026 · most notably Illinois v. Gates (1983), United States v. Leon (1984)

1,596 federal appellate · 209 district · 2,292 state decisions — followed in 47 states

2.3k0197719801990200020102020decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedUnited States v. Chadwick (from First Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Applies 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act)

Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Katz v. United States · Carroll v. United States · Chimel v. California · Coolidge v. New Hampshire

Cited together with Arkansas v. Sanders · Katz v. United States · Chambers v. Maroney · Terry v. Ohio · Chimel v. California

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 4,866 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “assures the individual whose property is searched or seized of the lawful authority of the executing officer, his need to search, and the limits of his power to search.”
    161 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Once law enforcement officers have reduced luggage or other personal property not immediately associated with the person of the arrestee to their exclusive control, and there is no longer any danger that the arrestee might gain access to the property to seize a weapon or destroy evidence, a search of that property is no longer an incident of the arrest.”
    117 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and possessions, against unreasonable searches and seizures.”
    28 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.