Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 216 F.2d 1 - White v. United States

White v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

216 F.2d 1 · 1954

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
2
states following
January 1983
most recently cited

28 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently January 1983 · most notably United States v. Garber (1979), State v. Thornton (1962)

28 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

1201954196019701980decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 2106

Relies on Kotteakos v. United States · United States v. Johnson · Bryan v. United States · Crawford v. United States · Remmer 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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““It was competent to be considered by the jury in passing upon the credibility of the witness and in determining the defendant’s intent. The letter was not a subsequent self-serving act. It was written, according to the witness, before the return was filed, and the jury might well have believed that the letter showed better than any other evidence the defendant’s state of mind and his intention in filing the return.” 216 F.2d 1, 6 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Statements of design or plan, as already noticed (ante, Sec. 1725), are in general admissible, so far as the design or plan is relevant to show the doing of the act designed. * * * Upon the same principle, the expressions of plan, by the accused, not to do the thing charged, or to do a different thing, are equally admissible.” VI Wigmore on Evidence, 3rd Ed., § 1732, p. 99. (Emphases in original.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““Rule 5(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure [18 U.S.C.A.] have [sic] been construed to permit the District Court to take judicial notice of the proceedings before the Commissioner on preliminary examination which have been transmitted to the Clerk of the District Court. See White v. United States, 5 Cir., 216 F.2d 1 , 4.””
    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.