Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 511 F.2d 953 - United States v. Pomponio

United States v. Pomponio’s Empirical Analysis

511 F.2d 953 · 1975

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
July 2018
most recently cited

22 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2018 · most notably Perrin v. United States (1979), Pomponio v. United States (1975)

22 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

12019751980199020002010decided

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. § 1952 · 18 U.S.C. § 201 (Bank Bribery Amendments) · 18 U.S.C. § 215 · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 18 U.S.C. § 3731

Relies on United States v. Nardello · May v. United States · United States v. Thomas F. Johnson, J. Kenneth Edlin, and William L. Robinson · United States v. Rizzo · United States v. Kenner

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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[t]he ‘unlawful activity’ specified in the [Travel] Act may be [an offense] under either state or federal law and reference to such law is necessary only to identify the type of ‘unlawful activity’ in which the defendants intended to engage. Proof that the unlawful objective was accomplished or that the referenced law has actually been violated is not a necessary element of the offense defined in section 1952.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “. While the states and the federal government have enacted statutes dealing with the corruption of public officials, they have also extended the concept of bribery into areas of private conduct which we think appropriately fall within the ambit of the Travel Act. [ 18 U.S.C. § 1952 ].”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “prostitution offenses in violation of the laws of the State in which they are committed.”
    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.