Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 536 F.2d 286 - United States v. Morrison

United States v. Morrison’s Empirical Analysis

536 F.2d 286 · 1976

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
2
states following
May 2022
most recently cited

27 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently May 2022 · most notably United States v. Ross (2000), 118 Wash. 2d 151 - State v. Hopper (1992)

27 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions

150197619801990200020102020decided

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 Morissette v. United States · Hamling v. United States · Hagner v. United States · United States v. Debrow · United States v. Hess

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

  1. “[A]n indictment is sufficient if it, first, contains the elements of the offense charged and fairly informs the defendant of the charge against which he must defend, and, second, enables him to plead an acquittal or conviction in bar of future prosecutions.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[in a conversion action the defendant must have] an intent to exercise dominion or control over the property in a manner inconsistent with the rights of another.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Criminal intent is an element of a violation of S 1711.”
    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.