Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 133 F.2d 87 - Stephan v. United States

Stephan v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

133 F.2d 87 · 1943

Citation profile

80
cited by 80 later decisions
4
cited 4 times by the Supreme Court
11
states following
October 1989
most recently cited

53 federal appellate · 1 district · 13 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 80 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 1989 · most notably Williams v. People of State of New York (1949), Cramer v. United States (1945)

53 federal appellate · 1 district · 13 state decisions — followed in 11 states

26019431950196019701980decided

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 Berger v. United States · Hagner v. United States · Holt v. United States · Funk v. United States · Dunlop 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 80 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““(2) Where the witness, after his examination in chief on the stand, has refused to submit to cross-examination, the opportunity of thus probing and testing his statements has substantially failed, and his direct testimony should be struck out. On the circumstances of the case, the refusal or evasion of answers to one or more questions only need not lead to this result. [Emphasis added.] . . . ‘ ‘ Courts treat this situation with varying degrees of strictness. It should be left to the determination of the trial judge, regard being had chiefly to the motive of the witness and the materiality of the answer.” (5 Wigmore, Evidence [3d ed.] p. 112.)”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““We think, however, that such information should have been disclosed to the Judge in open court and in the presence of appellant. Such appears to have been the practice in the cases cited. We think that the interest of convicted persons about to be sentenced is more carefully safegurded by open hearings under such rules as the court may adopt.””
    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.