United States of America, Plaintiff-Respondent v. Raymond A. O'COnnOr’s Empirical Analysis
237 F.2d 466 · 1956
Citation profile
93 federal appellate · 2 district · 16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 136 later decisions — most recently December 2015 · most notably United States v. Indiviglio (1965), Gordon v. United States (1971)
93 federal appellate · 2 district · 16 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 Kotteakos v. United States · Holland v. United States · Costello v. United States · Screws v. United States · Hormel v. Helvering
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 136 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a] criminal defendant is entitled to have instructions presented relating to any theory of defense for which there is any foundation in the evidence, no matter how weak or incredible that evidence may be.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Restrictions on examination of taxpayer. — No taxpayer shall be subjected to unnecessary examination or investigations, and only one inspection of a taxpayer’s books of account shall be made for each taxable year unless the taxpayer requests otherwise or unless the Secretary or his delegate, after investigation, notifies the taxpayer in writing that an additional inspection is necessary.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"Thus the general rule is that a defendant cannot raise an objection on appeal for the first time if he has failed to object specifically to a charge or failed to request a charge omitted by the trial court. But in criminal cases federal appellate courts have sometimes noticed errors to which no proper objection has been taken 'if the errors are obvious, or if they otherwise seriously affect the fairness, integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings.' "”
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.