United States v. Dimas’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3501 · 8 U.S.C. § 1324 (§ 274 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Illinois v. Gates · Florida v. Royer · Whren v. United States · Berkemer v. McCarty
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“did not create double hearsay, as an unofficial interpreter is no more than a language conduit.”
2 later decisions 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.