United States v. Larson’s Empirical Analysis
112 F.3d 600 · 1997
Citation profile
40 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 63 later decisions — most recently June 2025 · most notably United States v. Enjady (1998), United States v. Germosen (1998)
40 federal appellate · 4 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 Huddleston v. United States · United States v. S.A. Empresa de Viacao Aerea Rio Grandense · Murphy v. Sullivan · United States v. Terry · United States v. Bermingham
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 63 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"In a criminal case in which the defendant is accused of an offense of sexual assault, evidence of the defendant's commission of another offense or offenses of sexual assault is admissible, and may be considered for its bearing on any matter to which it is relevant."”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'So long as the sentencing court does not rely on misinformation, its ‘discretion is largely unlimited either as to the kind of information [the court] may consider, or the source from which it may come > 4”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The practical effect of the new rules is to put evidence of uncharged offenses in sexual assault and child molestation cases on the same footing as other types of relevant evidence that are not subject to a special exclusionary rule. The presumption is in favor of admission. The underlying legislative judgment is that the evidence admissible pursuant to the proposed rules is typically relevant and probative, and that its probative value is normally not outweighed by any risk of prejudice or other adverse effects.”
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.