Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 166 F.2d 863 - United States v. Grayson

United States v. Grayson’s Empirical Analysis

166 F.2d 863 · 1948

Citation profile

146
cited by 146 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
11
states following
July 2009
most recently cited

92 federal appellate · 2 district · 18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 146 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2009 · most notably Jencks v. United States (1957), 23 Cal. 3d 208 - People v. Bolton (1979)

92 federal appellate · 2 district · 18 state decisions — followed in 11 states

6401948195019601970198019902000decided

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. § 2

Relies on Kotteakos v. United States · Bollenbach v. United States · Durland v. United States · Bruno v. United States · Weiler 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 146 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “it was part of their regular course of business to report to him what the declarants themselves knew, as it was part of his business to record what they said.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “arouse suspicion that the accused is a person who has found it useful or necessary to conceal his identity.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “`multiple hearsay' is no more competent now than single hearsay was before.”
    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.