United States v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently November 2013
15 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. § 1503
Relies on Ashe v. Swenson · Dunn v. United States · United States v. Dotterweich · Sealfon v. United States · Libby, McNeill & Libby v. Alaska Industrial Board
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Unless the record of the prior proceeding affirmatively demonstrated that an issue involved in the second trial was definitely determined in the former trial, the possibility that it may have been does not prevent relitigation of that issue.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“The inquiry ‘must be set in a practical frame and viewed with an eye to all the circumstances of the proceedings.’ Any test more technically restrictive would, of course, simply amount to a rejection of the rule of collateral estoppel in criminal proceedings, at least in every case where a final judgment was based on a general verdict of acquittal.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“is embodied in the Fifth Amendment guarantee against double jeopardy”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.