United States v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis
617 F.2d 1063 · 1980
Citation profile
182 federal appellate · 14 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 240 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2023 · most notably United States v. Villamonte-Marquez (1983), United States v. Alfonso (1985)
182 federal appellate · 14 district · 5 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 14 U.S.C. § 1 (Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2006) · 14 U.S.C. § 2 · 14 U.S.C. § 89 · 18 U.S.C. § 7 · 19 U.S.C. § 1401 (Tariff Act of 1930) · 19 U.S.C. § 1431 (Tariff Act of 1930) · 19 U.S.C. § 1433 (Tariff Act of 1930) · 19 U.S.C. § 1434 (Tariff Act of 1930)
Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Katz v. United States · Carroll v. United States · Rakas v. Illinois · Delaware v. Prouse
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 240 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The Coast Guard may make inquiries, examinations, inspections, searches, seizures, and arrests upon the high seas and waters over which the United States has jurisdiction, for the prevention, detection, and suppression of violations of laws of the United States. For such purposes, commissioned, warrant, and petty officers may at any time go on board of any vessel subject to the jurisdiction, or to the operation of any law, of the United States, address inquiries to those on board, examine the ship’s documents and papers, and examine, inspect, and search the vessel and use all necessary force to compel compliance.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“in the complete absence of suspicion of criminal activity.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Panama’s consent to the search constituted a waiver of any such common law rights. It makes no difference that those aboard the PHGH were not parties to Panama’s consent, since rights under international common law must belong to sovereign nations, not to individuals, just as treaty rights are the rights of the sovereign. Thus, Panama’s waiver of its common law rights completely removed any international law concerns from the case.”
2 later decisions 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.