Carbo v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
314 F.2d 718 · 1963
Citation profile
411 federal appellate · 10 district · 58 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 516 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2024 · most notably United States v. Nixon (1974), United States v. Haldeman (1976)
411 federal appellate · 10 district · 58 state decisions — followed in 25 states
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) · 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 18 U.S.C. § 875 · 47 U.S.C. § 301 · 47 U.S.C. § 605
Relies on Glasser v. United States · Wong Sun v. United States · Napue v. People of the State of Illinois · Lutwak v. United States · Michelson 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 516 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he better doctrine is that the judge is always to decide, as concededly he generally must, any issues of fact on which the competence of evidence depends, and that, if he decides it to be competent, he is to leave it to the jury to use like any other evidence, without instructing them to consider it as proof only after they too have decided a preliminary issue which alone makes it competent.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Credibility involves more than demeanor. It apprehends the over-all evaluation of testimony in the light of its rationality or internal consistency and the manner in which it hangs together with other evidence.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““It is for the judge then, and not the jury, to determine the admissibility of the declarations. In making this determination the test is not whether the defendants’ connection had by independent evidence been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, but whether, accepting the independent evidence as credible, the judge is satisfied that a prima facie case (one which would support a finding) has been made. Thereafter it is the jury’s function to determine whether the evidence, including the declarations, is credible and convincing beyond a reasonable doubt.” Id. at 737 .”
4 later decisions 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.