Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 122 F.2d 461 - Evans v. United States

Evans v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

122 F.2d 461 · 1941

Citation profile

66
cited by 66 later decisions
3
cited 3 times by the Supreme Court
5
states following
February 2011
most recently cited

49 federal appellate · 4 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 66 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2011 · most notably Smith v. United States (1954), Griffin v. United States (1949)

49 federal appellate · 4 district · 5 state decisions

23019411950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Coffin v. United States · Cochran v. United States · St. Clair v. United States · Holmgren v. United States · Perovich 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 66 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““ ‘There must ordinarily be present and concur five verities, to wit: (a) The evidence must be in fact, newly discovered, i. e., discovered since the trial; (b) facts must be alleged from which the court may infer diligence on the part of the movant; (c) the evidence relied on, must not be merely cumulative or impeaching; (d) it must be material to the issues involved; and (e) it must be such, and of such nature, as that, on a new trial, the newly discovered evidence would probably produce an acquittal.’ Johnson v. United States, 8 Cir., 1929, 32 F.2d 127, 130 . This is an accurate statement of the applicable law. See also Evans v. United States, 10 Cir., 1941, 122 F.2d 461, 469 ; United States v. Hiss, D.C.S.D.N.Y.1952, 107 F.Supp. 128, 136 .” 208 F.2d p. 649.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The corpus delicti, as relates to homicide, is composed of two elements: (a) The death of the person alleged to have been killed; (b) that some criminal agency caused such death. . . 59 Of course, both of these elements must be established beyond a reasonable doubt. When the jury find these established, the next inquiry is as to the identity of the criminal agency; and this, too, must be established beyond a reasonable doubt, but is properly no part of the corpus delicti.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““The case will be remanded, however, only if showing is made to the appellate court that the lower court would be justified in granting the new trial.””
    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.