Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 29 F.3d 270 - United States v. Smith

United States v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

29 F.3d 270 · 1994

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
1
states following
January 2011
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently January 2011

7 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

70199420002010decided

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 16 U.S.C. § 703 (Arctic Tundra Habitat Emergency Conservation Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 3401 · 18 U.S.C. § 3402 · 19 U.S.C. § 482

Relies on Morissette v. United States · Lambert v. People of the State of California · United States v. Freed · Vermont v. Cox · Hanil Bank v. Michelman

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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “no scienter element expressly written into the statute,”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “it shall be unlawM at any time, by any means or in any manner, to pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill, attempt to take, capture, or kill, possess, ... any migratory bird, any part, nest, or egg of any such bird ...”
    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.