United States v. Kinnard’s Empirical Analysis
465 F.2d 566 · 1972
Citation profile
65 federal appellate · 3 district · 14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 91 later decisions — most recently April 2020 · most notably 44 Cal. 3d 543 - People v. Hovey (1988), United States v. Leonard (1974)
65 federal appellate · 3 district · 14 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 28 U.S.C. § 291
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · Kotteakos v. United States · Hoffa v. United States · Sorrells v. United States · Sherman 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 91 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a government informer's addiction to narcotic drugs and his indictment for narcotics violations . . . increase[s] the danger that he will color his testimony to place guilt on the defendant for his own benefit.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a far narrower category of witnesses-namely, narcotics addicts who are paid informers for the Government with criminal charges pending against them .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The addict’s habit makes him uniquely subject to constant surveillance and susceptible to arrest — he is in a perpetual status of violating the law. For the addict, arrest is harassment of a special sort, for he is forced to undergo the beginnings of withdrawal symptoms. At this stage, a bribe of heroin or the promise of immediate release and return to the habit seem irresistible..... Furthermore, the addict is only valuable if he produces fruitful tips or arranges sales which lead to prosecutions. The addicttumed-informer may therefore be desperate not only to produce results for the police, but also to avoid retribution from powerful figures in the drug trade. This desperation may well lead him to lie, and increases the danger that he will misrepresent the involvement of those whom he fingers.”
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.