Moore v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
150 U.S. 57 · 1893
Citation profile
197 federal appellate · 2 district · 56 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 284 later decisions (17 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 1990 · most notably United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co. (1940), Goldsby v. United States (1895)
197 federal appellate · 2 district · 56 state decisions — followed in 20 states
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 Crumpton v. United States · Alexander v. United States · Shailer v. Bumstead · Van Stone v. Stillwell & Bierce Manufacturing Co.
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 284 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The fact that the testimony also had a tendency to show that defendant had been guilty of Camp’s murder would not be sufficient to exclude it, if it were otherwise competent.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““As intimated in the case of Alexander v. United States, 138 U. S. 353 , where the question relates to the tendency of certain testimony to throw light upon a particular fact, or to explain the conduct of a particular person, there is a certain discretion on the part of the trial judge which a court of errors will-not interfere with, unless it manifestly appear that the testimony has no legitimate bearing upon the question at issue, and is calculated to prejudice the accused in the minds of the jurors.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“considerable latitude is allowed on the question of motive. Just in proportion to the depravity of the mind would a motive be trifling and insignificant which might prompt the commission of a great crime. We can never say the motive was adequate to the offense; for human minds would differ in their ideas of adequacy, according to their own estimate of the enormity of crime, and a virtuous mind would find no motive sufficient to justify the felonious taking of human life.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. United States v. Day
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.