Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 954 F.2d 668 - United States v. Williams

United States v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

954 F.2d 668 · 1992

Citation profile

100
cited by 100 later decisions
4
states following
July 2020
most recently cited

68 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 100 later decisions — most recently July 2020 · most notably United States v. Davis (1994), United States v. Jones (1994)

68 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions

7201992200020102020decided

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 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 851 (§ 411 of the Controlled Substances Act)

Relies on Hampton v. United States · United States v. Kelly · United States v. Kinsey · United States v. Cohen

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

  1. “Section 851(e) is wholly reasonable, both to effectuate the legitimate purposes of enhanced sentencing for recidivists, and to eliminate a host of practical problems with respect to ancient records absent such a provision.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “merely set forth aggravating circumstances the presence of which require a trial court to increase the sentence of a habitual offender”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “No person who stands convicted of an offense trader this part may challenge the validity of any prior conviction alleged under this section which occurred more than five years before the date of the information alleging such prior conviction.”
    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.