Helms v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
310 F.2d 236 · 1962
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently November 2007
15 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 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 28 U.S.C. § 1732
Relies on Riggs v. United States · Daigle v. United States · Nunnally v. United States · Bernhardt 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The jury returned a verdict finding the defendants guilty of certain overt acts charged in the indictment. The Court, after instructions, re-submitted the case to the jury to place their verdicts in the proper form. No objection was raised by the defendants and we find this procedure was proper. The Court has the power, before accepting a verdict and discharging the jury to permit the jury to correct a mistake in the verdict.”
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.