United States v. Schmidt’s Empirical Analysis
471 F.2d 385 · 1972
Citation profile
36 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently September 2004 · most notably Singh v. Ashcroft (2004), Valansi v. Ashcroft (2002)
36 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 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. § 1005 · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 18 U.S.C. § 656
Relies on First National City Bank v. Banco Nacional de Cuba · United States v. Unicorn Enterprises, Inc. · Dioguardi v. United States · Pierson v. Ray · Associated Press v. Taft-Ingalls Corp.
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.
“Criminal intent may be inferred from all the facts and circumstances of the ease. It “exists if a person acts knowingly and if the natural result of his conduct would be to injure or defraud the bank even though this may not have been his motive.””
4 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.