Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 501 F.2d 1284 - United States v. Constant

United States v. Constant’s Empirical Analysis

501 F.2d 1284 · 1974

Citation profile

45
cited by 45 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
August 2015
most recently cited

38 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 45 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2015 · most notably Williams v. United States (1982), United States v. Hornaday (2004)

38 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

32019741980199020002010decided

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. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 3651

Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Glasser v. United States · Kotteakos v. United States · Pereira v. United States · Hagner 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 45 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Reviewing the case from the perspective provided in Kotteakos [ ] we stand convinced that the judgment was not substantially swayed by the error, and that the error had but slight effect on the jury. The evidence of guilt here is overwhelming.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “This collection was made possible by the bank’s procedure of clearing checks through the mail. The use of the mails in achieving this result is sufficient to make Constant’s conduct punishable under 18 U.S.C. § 1341 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “of a type that has the potential for great prejudice,”
    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.