Phelps v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

68 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

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 82 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““[A] long history of human frailty and governmental overreaching for conviction justifies dis trust in accomplice testimony. Cobham’s misplaced hope for immunity that helped send Raleigh to the Tower is on the same level with the hope of some narcotic peddler or some other poor wretch to save his skin by laying the entire blame on a friend or close associate....””

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Ward v. United States · Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes v. McKee

2. ““Whoever knowingly and willfully, with intent to defraud the United States, smuggles, or clandestinely introduces into the United States any merchandise which should have been invoiced, or makes out or passes, or attempts to pass, through the customhouse any false, forged, or fraudulent invoice, or other document or paper; or “Whoever fraudulently or knowingly imports or brings into the United States, any merchandise contrary to law, or receives, conceals, buys, sells, or in any manner facilitates the transportation, concealment, or sale of such merchandise after importation, knowing the same to have been imported or brought into the United States contrary to law— “Shall be fined not more than 810,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. “Proof of defendant’s possession of such goods, unless explained to the satisfaction of the jury, shall be deemed evidence sufficient to authorize conviction for violation of this section.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Babb v. United States

3. ““Whether the error is reversible error depends on the circumstance of each case and the conduct of the trial as a whole. Requests to charge are ‘not to be considered abstractly or in vacuo .... They must be considered in their relation to the trial as a whole.’ ” •X- -X* * “Refusal to charge may be regarded as reversible error if, but only if, (1) it is in itself a correct charge, (2) it is not substantially covered in the main charge, and (3) it is on such a vital point in the case that the failure to give it deprived defendant of a defense and seriously impaired its effective presentation.” (At 53). [Emphasis supplied.]”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Busby