United States v. Mancuso’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

29 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

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. ““Proof of another crime which aids in or is appropriate in establishing the crime in question is admissible. [Citations omitted.] Prior and subsequent crimes are admissible on the issue of intent to commit the crime in question. [Citations omitted.] Prior or subsequent, the similar act should not be too remote in point of time from the offense charged. [Citations omitted.] Such remoteness is not the case here. Nor is there abuse of discretion by the trial judge in admitting the prior similar acts going to the issue of intent. [Citations omitted.] Where the prior acts or crimes are clearly part of the larger scheme, have a clear connection with the crime charged, and are patently a part thereof, they are admissible in evidence. [Citations omitted.]””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Jones

2. “The issue you must decide arises under the second element of the offense which is doing such act or acts wilfully and with knowledge that the motor vehicle had been stolen. That is the issue for decision by you in this case.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Cameron