Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 323 F.2d 245 - Blake v. United States

Blake v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

323 F.2d 245 · 1963

Citation profile

42
cited by 42 later decisions
1
states following
March 2004
most recently cited

37 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently March 2004 · most notably United States v. Beer (1975), United States v. Braverman (1975)

37 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

22019631970198019902000decided

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. § 1001 (Comprehensive Thrift and Bank Fraud Prosecution and Taxpayer Recovery Act of 1990)

Relies on United States v. Gilliland · United States v. Bramblett · Weinstock v. United States · Gonzales v. United States · Brandow 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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “* * * an essential element of the offense of making a false, fictitious and fraudulent statement as charged in [Count IV] of the Indictment is that the statement be “material.” In determining whether such a statement is material, the test is whether it has a natural tendancy to influence or was capable of influencing agency action * * *. If you find beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant’s statement * * * had a natural tendency to influence or was capable of influencing the agency to which it was made * * * to pay defendant on the basis of his statement, then you should find that such statement was material.”
    7 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.