United States v. Abrams’s Empirical Analysis
427 F.2d 86 · 1970
Citation profile
51 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 66 later decisions — most recently September 2008 · most notably United States v. Jewell (1976), Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum Dated September Marc Rich Co Ag v. United States (1984)
51 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 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. § 1001 (Comprehensive Thrift and Bank Fraud Prosecution and Taxpayer Recovery Act of 1990) · 18 U.S.C. § 1505 · 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 8 U.S.C. § 1304 (§ 264 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Dunn v. United States · Mills v. Alabama · Namet v. United States · Mackay v. Nesbett · United States v. Southwestern Cable Co.
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 66 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““An act is done knowingly if done voluntarily and intentionally and not because of innocent mistake or accident. In order to find that the Defendant knowingly made a false statement on Form No. 447, the jury is not required to find that the Defendant actually read the form or had it read to him, if the jury finds from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the Defendant acted with reckless disregard of whether the statements made were true or with a conscious purpose to avoid learning the truth. “The jury is instructed that all the circumstances surrounding the transaction are to be considered in determining whether the Defendant was adequately alerted to read Form No. 4473 by the form itself or by other factors.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“unless substantial prejudice results from its omission.”
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.