United States v. Sumner’s Empirical Analysis
119 F.3d 658 · 1997
Citation profile
36 federal appellate · 3 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently June 2025 · most notably United States v. Enjady (1998), United States v. Guardia (1998)
36 federal appellate · 3 district · 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2241 (Amber Hagerman Child Protection Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 2246 · 18 U.S.C. § 3509
Relies on Huddleston v. United States · United States v. Valenzuela-Bernal · Laws v. United Missouri Bank · United States v. Shoffner · United States v. Whitted
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 58 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“In other-respects, the general standards of the rules of evidence Ml continue to apply, including the restrictions on hearsay evidence and the court’s authority under Evidence Rule 403 to exclude evidence whose probative value is substantially outweighed by its prejudicial effect. * * * 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.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident.”
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.