Smith v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
357 F.2d 486 · 1966
Citation profile
77 federal appellate · 1 district · 24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 112 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2014 · most notably Sabbath v. United States (1968), Tillman v. United States (1969)
77 federal appellate · 1 district · 24 state decisions — followed in 16 states
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 Carroll v. United States · Weeks v. United States · Ker v. State of California · United States v. Rabinowitz · Preston 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 112 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The decision to continue (with the) trial involves the careful balancing of defendant’s right to confront his accusers, and other possible prejudice which might result from his absence, ... against the time and expense caused by defendant’s effort to defeat the proceedings by his departure or flight.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Okumura · State v. Vaimili““If it appears that a defendant or the government is prejudiced by a joinder of offenses or of defendants in an indictment or information or by such joinder for trial together, the court may order an election or separate trials of counts, grant a severance of defendants or provide whatever other relief justice requires.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““ * * * The offenses charged are of the same or similar character, narcotic transactions closely related in time, place and manner of execution, so that they properly could have been joined in one indictment in separate counts. * * * ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Dobbins v. State
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.