United States v. Claude L. Smith, United States of America v. James P. Jarvis’s Empirical Analysis
478 F.2d 976 · 1973
Citation profile
35 federal appellate · 1 district · 47 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 90 later decisions — most recently June 2025 · most notably 12 Cal. 3d 686 - People v. Taylor (1974), 27 Cal. 4th 102 - People v. Lawley (2002)
35 federal appellate · 1 district · 47 state decisions — followed in 18 states
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
Relies on Bray v. Peyton · People v. Pena · 30 Mich. App. 561 - People v. Butler · United States v. Claude L. Smith, United States of America v. James P. Jarvis
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 90 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““We think the prosecutor’s warning was plainly a threat that resulted in depriving the defendants of Twitty’s testimony. The government argues in its brief that Twitty had a right to be advised that he might incriminate himself and be subject to prosecution if he elected to testify, and the government suggests that the prosecutor was only protecting Twitty’s rights when he warned him. Even if the prosecutor’s motives were impeccable, however, the implication of what he said was calculated to transform Twitty from a willing witness to one who would refuse to testify, and that in fact was the result. ... If the prosecutor thought the witness should be advised of his rights then he should have suggested that the court explain them to Twitty. The matter would have been presented to Twitty by the court without any threats or implication of retaliation.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“If the prosecutor thought the witness should be advised of his rights then he should have suggested that the court explain them to [the witness]. The matter would then have been presented to [the witness] by the court without any threats or implication of retaliation.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Matter of JWY · In re J. W. Y.“'[a] prosecutor may impeach a witness in court but he may not intimidate him--in or out of court.'”
2 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.