State v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
136 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 136 later decisions — most recently December 2023 · most notably State v. Sage (1987), 85 Ohio App. 3d 623 - State v. Claytor (1993)
136 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
Relies on Wong Sun v. United States · Coolidge v. New Hampshire · Ker v. State of California · Sedillo v. United States · Harris 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 136 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the initial intrusion which afforded the authorities the plain view was lawful; (2) the discovery of the evidence was inadvertent; and (3) the incriminating nature of the evidence was immediately apparent to the seizing authorities.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage““We decline to contort the plain view doctrine so as to justify the seizure here under review, since we would thus be allowing this narrow exception to the warrant requirement to swallow the rule. Although Detective Tell, at the time of the search, harbored a generalized suspicion that the Oldsmobile body parts were stolen, his own testimony at the hearing on the motion to suppress indicated that upon mere inspection of these seemingly innocuous items it was not ‘immediately apparent’ that appellee was in possession of property which Tell knew, or had probable cause to believe, was contraband.” 55 Ohio St. 2d 82, 86 , 377 N.E.2d 1013, 1016 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““Quite to the contrary, the record discloses that it was necessary for * * * [the officer] to inquire as to where the two vehicles were purchased, and to place a telephone call to the auto salvage yard, before he became suspicious that the unattached body parts may have been stolen. Moreover, it was not until he had seized the parts, and thereafter conducted a two-month-long investigation, that [the officer] knew for certain that some of the auto parts in * * * [defendant’s] possession had been stolen.” Id. at 85-86 . The court found that the officer harbored no more than a generalized suspicion at the inception and that the incriminating nature of'the parts cannot be said to have been immediately apparent to the officer.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Mirlisena
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.