Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 283 F.2d 430 - Cape v. United States

Cape v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

283 F.2d 430 · 1960

Citation profile

57
cited by 57 later decisions
4
states following
April 2021
most recently cited

44 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently April 2021 · most notably United States v. Nelson (1969), Gorin v. United States (1963)

44 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

3301960197019801990200020102020decided

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. § 1951 (Hobbs Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291

Relies on Dunn v. United States · Monroe v. United States · Remmer v. United States · Bianchi v. United States · Stoppelli 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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““We have listened to the recording carefully; although some portions are unintelligible, many significant parts are not. The thread, though thin in places, is never completely broken. We cannot unhesitatingly say that the inaudible segments are ‘so substantial’ as to render the whole ‘untrustworthy’ or that the lower court abused its discretion in admitting it in evidence.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The admissibility of taped conversations is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial judge.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “that partial inaudibility is no more valid reason for excluding recorded conversations than the failure of a personal witness to overhear all of a conversation should exclude his testimony as to those parts he did hear. Unless the unintelligible portions are so substantial as to render the recording as a whole untrustworthy the recording is admissible, and the decision should be left to the sound discretion of the trial judge.”
    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.