Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 562 F.2d 1192 - United States v. McMahon

United States v. McMahon’s Empirical Analysis

562 F.2d 1192 · 1977

Citation profile

37
cited by 37 later decisions
2
states following
March 2009
most recently cited

29 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently March 2009 · most notably United States v. Espinosa (1985), United States v. Peveto (1989)

29 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

2101977198019902000decided

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. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 8 U.S.C. § 1324 (§ 274 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))

Relies on Nye & Nissen v. United States · United States v. Falcone · United States v. Peoni · Ditson v. California · United States v. Butler

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

  1. “there was no proof of any incriminating contacts by defendant with the load car occupants.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “deficiencies in the Government's case on the substantive counts [of the commission of the offense or aiding and abetting its commission] applies to the conspiracy charge as well”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Mere presence ... may create suspicion, but it does not establish participation or guilt.”
    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.