Bell v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
382 F.2d 985 · 1967
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 1 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently September 2017 · most notably United States of America Ex Rel. Ruben Williams v. John Twomey and Peter Bensinger (1972), Commonwealth v. Perez (1991)
17 federal appellate · 1 district · 7 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. § 2312
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Scalza v. United States · Smayda 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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is urged that Agent Howerton’s testimony pertaining to appellant’s declaration should have been excluded for two reasons. The first is that Agent Howerton was obliged to advise appellant of his Miranda rights orally and not in writing. This is absurd. If appellant read and understood the written advice, then he acquired knowledge of his rights in a very satisfactory and most unimpeachable way. There is no requirement as to the precise manner in which police communicate the required warnings to one suspected of crime. The requirement is that the police fully advise such a person of his rights, and appellant made no showing that he did not read or understand the written warnings which were presented to him.” Id. at 987.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Gilmore v. State · Ex Parte Bagley
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.