Sutton v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
391 F.2d 592 · 1968
Citation profile
17 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently June 1987
17 federal appellate ·
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. § 2115
Relies on Glasser v. United States · Weiss v. United States · Roe v. United States · Holt v. United States · Ahrens 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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The trial judge must be given considerable latitude in allowing evidence to show the element of intent. Holt v. United States, 5 Cir., 1965, 342 F.2d 163 , 166; Roe v. United States, 5 Cir., 1963, 316 F.2d 617 , 621; Weiss v. United States, 5 Cir. 1941, 122 F.2d 675 , 682. Furthermore, the court properly charged the jury concerning the limited use they should make of the evidence. Condrey v. United States, 5 Cir. 1965, 351 F.2d 456 ; Ah-rens v. United States, 5 Cir. 1959, 265 F.2d 514 .””
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.