United States v. Sennett’s Empirical Analysis
505 F.2d 774 · 1974
Citation profile
23 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 5010
Relies on Davis v. United States · United States v. Bohle · United States v. Shapiro · Otney v. United States · Taylor v. Royal Insurance
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In this case the sanity of the defendant at the time of the offense charged is an issue. This means that, in addition to proving beyond a reasonable doubt the elements of the offense charged, the prosecution must also prove beyond a reasonable doubt that at the time of the offense charged the defendant did not have a mental disease or defect, or that despite the mental disease or defect he had substantial capacity both to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct and to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“) standard, which provides that: 5 A person is not responsible for criminal conduct if, as the result of mental disease or defect, he lacks substantial capacity to appreciate the criminality of his conduct [the”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“prong of the standard] or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law [the”
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.