United States v. Larson’s Empirical Analysis
555 F.2d 673 · 1977
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2312 · 18 U.S.C. § 3500
Relies on Barker v. Wingo · Mapp v. Ohio · United States v. Marion · Davis v. Mississippi · Ohio v. Kentucky
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“This Court rejects defendant’s contention that a witness must be able to recall the exact date that a statement was made. The witness’ recollection of the date that the statement was made was sufficiently close in time to the date [of the crime charged] to support its admissibility. Even assuming that the car seen and the statement made with reference thereto were not the subject of the instant offense, we conclude that the evidence was admissible pursuant to Rule 404(b), Federal Rules of Evidence, (citations omitted.)”
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.