Smith v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
343 F.2d 539 · 1965
Citation profile
92 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 106 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2024 · most notably Barnes v. United States (1973), United States v. Check (1978)
92 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 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. § 1708 · 18 U.S.C. § 495 · 39 U.S.C. § 501
Relies on Townsend v. Sain · Escobedo v. Illinois · Pereira v. United States · Hagner v. United States · United States v. Bayer
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 106 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““We deal in this case with substantive federal crimes of great antiquity. Originally the prevention of these crimes served the needs of a postal system, the most serious problems of which were the depredations of highwaymen. The anonymity of the modern postal system creates new problems of proof. Congress has helped in some respects with wise amendments of the statutes; judicial appraisal of the realities of delivering and receiving mail in a modern urban environment must do the rest.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“§ 151.1 Private mail receptacles. (a) Designation as authorized depository. Every letter box or other receptacle intended or used for the receipt or delivery of mail on any city delivery route ... or other mail route is designated and authorized depository for mail within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. ... § 1708.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Whoever steals, takes, or abstracts, * * * from or out of any mail, post office, or station thereof, letter box, mail receptacle, or any mail route or other authorized depository for mail matter, or from a letter or mail carrier, any letter, postal card, package, bag, or mail, or abstracts or removes from any such letter, package, bag or mail, any article or thing contained therein, * * *; or $ $ $ $ $ Whoever * * * unlawfully has in his possession, any letter, postal card, package, bag, or mail, or any article or thing contained therein, which has been so stolen, taken, embezzled, or abstracted, as herein described, knowing the same to have been stolen * * * — ■ Shall be fined not more than $2,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.””
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.