Bins v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
331 F.2d 390 · 1964
Citation profile
81 federal appellate · 4 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 105 later decisions — most recently April 2025 · most notably United States v. Schlei (1997), United States v. Starks (1975)
81 federal appellate · 4 district · 5 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. § 1001 (Comprehensive Thrift and Bank Fraud Prosecution and Taxpayer Recovery Act of 1990) · 18 U.S.C. § 1010 · 28 U.S.C. § 46
Relies on Blockburger v. United States · Morgan v. Devine · Wales ex rel. Wales Trucking Co. v. United States · Hartford Fire Insurance v. Roberto
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 105 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[I]t is well settled that the test for determining whether several offenses are involved is whether identical evidence will support each of them, and if any dissimilar facts must be proved, there is more than one offense. Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299 , 52 S. Ct. 180 , 76 L. Ed. 306 (1932); Morgan v. Devine, 237 U.S. 632 , 35 S. Ct. 712 , 59 L. Ed. 1153 (1915). * * * Whether a continuous transaction results in the commission of but a single offense or separate offenses is not dependent on the number of unlawful motives in the mind of the accused, but is determined by whether separate and distinct prohibited acts, made punishable by law, have been committed. Caballero v. Hudspeth, 114 F. 2d 545, 547 (10th Cir. 1940).””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The failure to correct the duplicitous nature of the indictment in some manner was error. This becomes clear when you try to determine what the jury found. The jury cannot find a defendant guilty as to one of the offenses charged in the duplicitous count and not guilty as to the other charge in the same count; and a general verdict of guilty does not reveal whether the jury found the defendant guilty of one crime and not guilty of the others, or guilty of all of them.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ [I]t is well settled that the test for determining whether several offenses are involved is whether identical evidence will support each of them, and if any dissimilar facts must be proved, there is more than one offense. Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299 , 52 S.Ct. 180 , 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932); Morgan v. Devine, 237 U.S. 632 , 35 S.Ct. 712 , 59 L.Ed. 1153 (1915).””
2 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.