Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 282 FSUPP 635 - Silbert v. United States

Silbert v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

1968

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
2
states following
December 1984
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 4 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently December 1984

9 federal appellate · 4 district · 3 state decisions

100196819701980decided

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. § 1952 · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 18 U.S.C. § 871 (Presidential Threat Protection Act of 2000) · 26 U.S.C. § 4401 · 26 U.S.C. § 4411 · 26 U.S.C. § 4412 · 26 U.S.C. § 4422 · 26 U.S.C. § 4901

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · United States v. Wade · Mapp v. Ohio · Stovall v. Denno · Escobedo v. Illinois

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.

  1. ““We emphasize that we do not hold that these wagering tax provisions are as such constitutionally impermissible; we hold only that those who properly assert the constitutional privilege as to these provisions may not be criminally punished for failure to comply with their requirements. If, in different circumstances, a taxpayer is not confronted by substantial hazards of self-incrimination, or if he is otherwise outside the privilege’s protection, nothing we decide today would shield him from the various penalties prescribed by the wagering tax statutes.” 390 U.S. at 61, 88 S.Ct. at 709.”
    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.