Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 331 F.2d 85 - Drew v. United States

Drew v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

331 F.2d 85 · 1964

Citation profile

1,139
cited by 1,139 later decisions
38
states following
December 2025
most recently cited

340 federal appellate · 14 district · 752 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 1,139 later decisions — most recently December 2025 · most notably State v. Lott (1990), State v. Hamblin (1988)

340 federal appellate · 14 district · 752 state decisions — followed in 38 states

31901964197019801990200020102020decided

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 Pointer v. United States · People v. . Molineux · Page v. Work · Boyd v. United States

Cited together with Kotteakos v. United States · Chapman v. State of California · Bruton v. United States · Strickland v. Washington · Baker 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 1,139 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Evidence of other crimes is admissible when relevant to (1) motive, (2) intent, (3) the absence of mistake or accident, (4) a common scheme or plan embracing the commission of two or more crimes so related to each other that proof of the one tends to establish the other, and (5) the identity of the person charged with the commission of the crime on trial. When the evidence is relevant and important to one of these five issues, it is generally conceded that the prejudicial effect may be outweighed by the probative value.””
    39 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(1) he may become embarrassed or confounded in presenting separate defenses; (2) the jury may use the evidence of one of the crimes charged to infer a criminal disposition on the part of the defendant from which is found his guilt of the other crime or crimes charged; or (3) the jury may cumulate the evidence of the various crimes charged and find guilt when, if considered separately, it would not so find.”
    36 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Two or more offenses may be charged in the same indictment or information in a separate count for each offense if the offenses charged, whether felonies or misdemeanors or both, are of the same or similar character or are based on the same act or transaction or on two or more acts or transactions connected together or constituting parts of a common scheme or plan.”
    19 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.