State v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
1968
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently April 2019
4 federal appellate · 14 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. § 201 (Bank Bribery Amendments)
Relies on United States v. Harriss · Jordan v. De George · State v. Robertson · State v. Bloomenstiel
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“with the intent to influence his conduct in relation to his position, employment or duty.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“the gist of [bribery] is that it tends to corrupt.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““In clear and unmistakable language that the gravamen of the offense denounced —the act forbidden — is the giving or offering to give (as well as the acceptance or offer to accept) anything of present or prospective value to the specifically delineated public officer, employee, or official with the intent of influencing his conduct ‘in relation to his position, employment or duty.’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Mutscher v. State
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.