Smith v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
236 F.2d 260 · 1956
Citation profile
36 federal appellate · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently February 1985 · most notably Commonwealth v. Bruno (1976), United States v. Clancy (1960)
36 federal appellate · 5 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. § 3281 · 26 U.S.C. § 145 · 28 U.S.C. § 1732
Relies on Holland v. United States · Costello v. United States · Smith v. United States · Shapiro v. United States · United States v. Johnson
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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Certainly, otherwise relevant evidence does not become incompetent because it incidentally proves commission of independent offenses. Hardy v. United States, 8 Cir., 1952, 199 F.2d 704 ; Bram v. United States, 8 Cir., 1955, 226 F.2d 858 . The exclusionary rule that prior offenses are not admissible against a defendant is not one of unbending rigidity. Thus, the rule will not be given application where the evidence is used to establish some material aspect of the prosecution’s case.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““ * * * [t]he government is not required to show the exact amount of error. If the understated taxable income be substantial, that is sufficient because the exact amount is not the gist of the offense. Cave v. United States, 8 Cir., 1947, 159 F.2d 464 , 468.””
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.