Harris v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
261 F.2d 792 · 1958
Citation profile
22 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently December 1985 · most notably United States v. Bertolotti (1975), United States v. Murray (1973)
22 federal appellate · 3 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. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 371
Relies on Jencks v. United States · Abdul v. United States
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Op position”, p. 1), while noting that many trial judges disapprove the practice, nevertheless concluded that note taking [ojrdinarily ... is within the sound discretion of the trial judge and does not constitute error” — particularly where, as in Harris , the trial court”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Yeager v. Greene
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.