Knight v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
310 F.2d 305 · 1962
Citation profile
30 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently April 2017 · most notably United States v. Haas (1978), United States v. Johnson (1978)
30 federal appellate · 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 18 U.S.C. § 1503
Relies on Pettibone v. United States · United States v. Truesdell · Catrino v. United States · McFarland v. United States · Samples 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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“must be to do some act or acts which tend to impede or influence, obstruct, or impede the due administration of justice.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ ‘On or about the 22nd day of March, 1961, in the Macon Division of the Middle District of Georgia, within the jurisdiction of this Court, said James Terrell Knight did unlawfully, willfully, knowingly, and corruptly endeavor to influence, obstruct and impede the due administration of justice . . . James Terrell Knight knowing that the said Lawrence L. Knight was a witness in said criminal case then pending against him . did . unlawfully, willfully, knowingly and corruptly offer and agree to pay to one Betty Frances Pope the sum of $100.00 . . . as an inducement to the said Betty Frances Pope to endeavor to influence . . . the said Lawrence L. Knight . . . ’” 310 F.2d 306 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“It is designed to protect witnesses in Federal courts and also to prevent a miscarriage of justice by corrupt methods. . . . The statute is broad enough to cover any act, committed corruptly, in an endeavor to impede or obstruct the due administration of justice. .”
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.