Andrews v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
162 U.S. 420 · 1896
Citation profile
99 federal appellate · 18 district · 26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 168 later decisions (20 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2010 · most notably Roth v. United States (1957), Sorrells v. United States (1932)
99 federal appellate · 18 district · 26 state decisions — followed in 13 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 United States v. Chase · Grimm v. United States · Goode v. United States · Reagan v. Aiken
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 168 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Error is attributed to the court below in permitting- the witness Flint to testify in the case, for the reason that he was an officer of the United States, and that correspondence was carried on, through the mails, for the sole purpose of obtaining evidence from the defendant upon which to base the prosecution. A similar contention was disposed of by this court in the case of Grimm v. United States, 156 U. S. 604 [ 15 S. Ct. 470 , 39 L. Ed. 550 ], where it was said: ‘It does not appear that it was the purpose of the post office inspector to induce or solicit the commission of a crime, but it was to ascertain whether the defendant was engaged in an unlawful business. The mere facts that the letters were written under an assumed name, and that the writer was a government official — a detective, he may be called — do not of themselves constitute a defense to the crime actually committed.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““Complaint is made because the court failed to give defendant’s requests for instructions, but the instructions actually given by the court are not disclosed by the record, and we may presume that such instructions covered the defendant’s requests so far as they stated the law correctly.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Chapman v. Reynolds““The mailing of a private sealed letter containing obscene matter in an envelope on which nothing appears but the name and address is an offense within the statute.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.