United States v. Howell’s Empirical Analysis
240 F.2d 149 · 1956
Citation profile
57 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 79 later decisions — most recently January 2017 · most notably United States v. Kenny (1972), Harold Hanger v. United States of America, Gale Mixen v. United States of America, Loretta Meyer v. United States (1968)
57 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 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
Relies on Opper v. United States · Hagner v. United States · United States v. Behrman · Amalgamated Meat Cutters & Butcher Workmen of North America v. Fairlawn Meats, Inc. · Switchmen's Union of North America v. Ogden Union Railway & Depot Co.
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 79 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) the evidence must be in fact, newly discovered, i. e., discovered since the trial; (b) facts must be alleged from which the court may infer diligence on the part of the movant; (c) the evidence relied on must not be merely cumulative or impeaching; (d) it must be material to the issues involved; and (e) it must be such, and of such nature, as that, on a new trial, the newly discovered evidence would probably produce an acquittal.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ * * * the sudden unexplained acquisition of wealth by an impecunious person at or about the time of a theft which he had an opportunity to commit, is competent evidence of guilt and will support *' * * conviction.” United States v. Howell, 240 F.2d 149 , 158 (3d Cir. 1956), quoting Hans-brough v. United States, 156 F.2d 327 , 329 (8th Cir. 1946).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““An indictment is sustainable if the ‘offense be described with sufficient clearness to- show a violation of law, and to enable the accused to know the nature and cause of the accusation and to plead the judgment, if one be rendered, in bar of further prosecution for the same offense.’ United States v. Behrman, 258 U.S. 280 , 288, 42 S.Ct. 303 , 304, 66 L.Ed. 619 .” 16”
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.