Bayless v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
200 F.2d 113 · 1952
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently October 1973
13 federal appellate · 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. § 2113 · 18 U.S.C. § 2314
Relies on McDonald v. United States · 11 Cal. App. 42 - People v. Mar Gin Suie · United States v. Dalhover · Hunt v. State
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A sawed-off, loaded shotgun with extra shells and the bank book bearing appellant’s name, both of which were found in the automobile as hereinbefore stated, were introduced into evidence. The shotgun was not used by the robber in the robbery and there was no further proof as to the bank book. Appellant claims prejudice. Everything in the automobile was properly put into evidence in the case. See People v. Mar Gin Suie, 1909, 11 Cal.App. 42 , 103 P. 951 ; Pedersen v. United States, 2 Cir., 1921, 271 F. 187 ; United States v. Dalhover, 7 Cir., 1938, 96 F.2d 355 at 359. The point is without merit.” (Emphasis supplied.)”
1 later decision 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.