SERNA’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently September 2023 · most notably 23 Cal. 4th 183 - People v. Superior Court (Zamudio) (2000), Marmolejo-Campos v. Holder (2009)
18 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1546 · 8 U.S.C. § 1 · 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (§ 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1251 (§ 241 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1254 (§ 244 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Jordan v. De George · Fong Haw Tan v. Phelan · Wadman v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · United States ex rel. Zaffarano v. Corsi · United States ex rel. Robinson v. Day
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“in the case of an altered document, the Government has not been harmed until a person actually uses it or intends to use it for fraudulent or deceitful purposes.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[c]ircumstances may exist under which the respondent might not have had the intent to use the altered immigration document in his possession unlawfully,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“); United States ex rel. Meyer v. Day, 54 F.2d 336, 337 (2d Cir. 1931) (stating that”
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.