United States v. Clizer’s Empirical Analysis
464 F.2d 121 · 1972
Citation profile
31 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently February 1999 · most notably 5 Cal. 3d 536 - Randone v. Appellate Department (1971), United States v. Kahn (1973)
31 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 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. § 1621 · 18 U.S.C. § 1623 · 18 U.S.C. § 371
Relies on Benton v. Maryland · United States v. Hutcheson · Hassett v. Welch · Weiler v. United States · Williams 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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(e) Proof beyond a reasonable doubt under this section is sufficient for conviction. It shall not be necessary that such proof be made by any particular number of witnesses or by documentary or other type of evidence.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“It is wholly immaterial what statute was in the mind of the District Attorney when he drew the indictment, if the charges made are embraced by some statute in force.... We must look to the indictment itself, and if it properly charges an offense under the laws of the United States, that is sufficient to sustain it, although the representative of the United States may have supposed that the offense charged was covered by a different statute.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“(a) Whoever under oath in any proceeding before or ancillary to any court or grand jury of the United States knowingly makes any false material declaration . . . shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.”
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.