United States v. Mitchell’s Empirical Analysis
172 F.3d 1104 · 1999
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently June 2017 · most notably 37 Cal. 4th 50 - People v. Cornwell (2005), United States v. Quattrone (2006)
19 federal appellate · 8 state decisions
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 O'NEAL v. McAninch · United States v. Feldman · United States v. Zipkin · United States v. Rahm · United States v. Annigoni
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[p]overty as proof of motive has in many cases little tendency to make theft more probable. Lack of money gives a person an interest in having more. But so does desire for money, without poverty. A rich man’s greed is as much a motive to steal as a poor man’s poverty. Proof of either, without more, is likely to amount to a great deal of unfair prejudice with little probative value.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“traditional view that evidence of poverty is not admissible to show motive, because it is of slight probative value and would be unfairly prejudicial to poor peo-pie charged with crimes.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“those courts admitting evidence of financial motive have been confronted with more than the mere fact that the defendant is poor.”
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.