Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 408 F.2d 1390 - Morrow v. United States

Morrow v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

408 F.2d 1390 · 1969

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
4
states following
October 2001
most recently cited

25 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently October 2001 · most notably United States v. Rose (1984), Scruggs v. United States (1971)

25 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

20019691970198019902000decided

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. § 2113

Relies on Nelson v. County of Los Angeles · Andrews v. United States · Hoffa v. United States · Myres v. United States · United States v. Viale

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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Direct evidence [that a gun is loaded] is unnecessary. ‘When * * * a robber displays a gun to back up his demands, he wants the victim to believe that it is loaded, and the fact-finder may fairly infer that it was.’ Wagner v. United States, 264 F.2d 524 , 530, n. 8 (9th Cir.), cert. denied 360 U.S. 936 , 79 S.Ct. 1459 , 3 L.Ed.2d 1548 (1959); Wheeler v. United States, 317 F.2d 615 , 618 (8th Cir. 1963). The defendant introduced no evidence to show that the guns were not loaded and, therefore, the jury could properly infer that they were loaded. Morrow v. United States, 408 F.2d 1390 , 1391 (8th Cir. 1969).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The test of whether a victim’s life has been placed in danger is an objective one; “not whether the employee was put in fear but whether his life was put in danger by the use of a dangerous weapon.” (Emphasis supplied.) United States v. Donovan, 242 F.2d 61 , 63 (2d Cir. 1957), rev’d on other grounds sub nom. Andrews v. United States, 373 U.S. 334 , 83 S.Ct. 1236 , 10 L.Ed.2d 383 (1963). 7”
    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.