Holmes v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
271 F.2d 635 · 1959
Citation profile
50 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently July 1982 · most notably Ogden v. United States (1962), United States v. Thomas F. Johnson, J. Kenneth Edlin, and William L. Robinson (1965)
50 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 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. § 3500
Relies on Jencks v. United States · Palermo v. United States · Rosenberg v. United States · Egan v. United States · Virginian Ry. Co. v. Armentrout
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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The Government now contends, however, that the Jencks Act does not apply to statements prepared by a government agent who becomes a witness at the trial. In the Jencks case, itself, the defendant sought the production of FBI reports in order to obtain material with which to cross examine an FBI informer, and clearly that was the situation which Congress had principally in mind when it enacted the Jeneks Act. The written report of the agent, however, is just as much a verbatim statement of the agent, who prepares it, as a written statement of an informer, incorporated in the report, is the statement of the informer. It is a statement within the literal and evident meaning of subsection (e) of the Act. Its use to contradict the agent who prepared it in no way contravenes the policy of the Act against the use of an investigator’s notes or summaries of information to contradict his informer. * * * “ * * * Certainly, however, we can find nothing in the Jencks Act which suggests that defense counsel are entitled to no statement of the witness, simply because he happens to be an agent of the FBI. * * * ” (Id. at page 638)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““At the trial, one of the principal witnesses for the government was an FBI agent who testified at length about his investigation and about' conversations he had with the defendants. The defense demanded the production of the memo-randa and reports prepared by the agent during his investigation and recording its result.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““Here, it is obvious that all of the statements and notes contained in Agent Hall’s thick file was information that he, Agent Hall, had actually obtained during the course of his investigation and should be considered a ‘statement’ within the meaning of the Act.””
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.