Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 273 U.S. 77 - Wong Tai v. United States

Wong Tai v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

273 U.S. 77 · 1927

Citation profile

1,634
cited by 1,634 later decisions
8
cited 8 times by the Supreme Court
19
states following
September 2024
most recently cited

805 federal appellate · 108 district · 104 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 1,634 later decisions (8 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2024 · most notably Will v. United States (1967), Carbo v. United States (1963)

805 federal appellate · 108 district · 104 state decisions — followed in 19 states

343019271930194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

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

Relies on Williamson v. United States · Armour Packing Company v. United States · Rosen v. United States · Hem v. United States

Cited together with Hagner v. United States · Glasser v. United States · Brady v. State of Maryland · Russell v. United States · Williamson 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 1,634 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““It is well settled that an indictment for conspiring to commit an offense — in which the conspiracy is the gist of the crime — it is not necessary to allege with technical precision all the elements essential to the commission of the offense which is the object of the conspiracy ... In charging such a conspiracy ‘certainty to a common intent, sufficient to identify the offense which the defendants conspired to commit, is all that is necessary.’ ””
    17 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The application for a bill of particulars is one addressed to the sound discretion of the court, and, there being no abuse of this discretion, its action thereon should not be disturbed.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““In charging such a conspiracy ‘certainty to a common intent, sufficient to identify the offense which the defendants conspired to commit, is all that is’ necessary.” Ibid., quoting Goldberg v. United States, 277 F. 211 , 213 (8 Cir. 1921).”
    3 later decisions 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.