Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 521 F.2d 957 - United States v. Smith

United States v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

521 F.2d 957 · 1975

Citation profile

137
cited by 137 later decisions
13
states following
February 2019
most recently cited

61 federal appellate · 5 district · 49 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 137 later decisions — most recently February 2019 · most notably United States v. Saunders (1989), United States v. Oates (1977)

61 federal appellate · 5 district · 49 state decisions — followed in 13 states

37019751980199020002010decided

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 Kotteakos v. United States · Pointer v. Texas · California v. Green · Barber v. Page · United States v. Nobles

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

  1. “(6) Records of regularly conducted activity. A memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, in any form, of acts, events, conditions, opinions, or diagnoses, made at or near the time by, or from information transmitted by, a person with knowledge, if kept in the course of a regularly conducted business activity, and if it was the regular practice of that business activity to make the memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, all as shown by the testimony of the custodian or other qualified witness, unless the source of information or the method or circumstances of preparation indicate lack of trustworthiness. The term “business” as used in this paragraph includes business, institution, association, profession, occupation, and calling of every kind, whether or not conducted for profit.”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “excluding, however, in criminal cases matters observed by police officers and other law enforcement personnel.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “(o)n its face, 803(8)(B) appears to (say that they are not, the court was) convinced, however, that 803(8)(B) should be read, in accordance with the obvious intent of Congress and in harmony with 803(8)(C) to authorize the admission of the reports of police officers and other law enforcement personnel at the request of the defendant in a criminal case.”
    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.