Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 316 F.2d 45 - Starks v. United States

Starks v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

316 F.2d 45 · 1963

Citation profile

40
cited by 40 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
November 1992
most recently cited

30 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 40 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 1992 · most notably Haynes v. United States (1968), Sipes v. United States (1963)

30 federal appellate · 2 district ·

3701963197019801990decided

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

Relies on Russell v. United States · Frye v. United States · Papadakis 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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““* * * we held that section 5841, which requires every person possessing a firearm to register it, is unconstitutional because by the act of registering, the possessor necessarily incriminates himself.” 316 F.2d at 46 .”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[S]uch an instruction could well have been objected to by appellant’s counsel. It could have been very harmful to appellant’s defense. He claimed that he did not participate in the matter at all, and an instruction relating to the status of ... his accomplices could well be taken by a jury, even though artfully and carefully phrased by the court, as indicating that the court thought the appellant had participated with them in the offense. This is exactly opposite to the conclusion that appellant was asking the jury to reach. This may be why appellant’s counsel did not ask for an instruction on the matter.”
    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.