Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 574 F.2d 988 - United States v. Smith

United States v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

574 F.2d 988 · 1978

Citation profile

76
cited by 76 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
December 2024
most recently cited

57 federal appellate · 4 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 76 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2024 · most notably Williams v. United States (1978), United States v. Renville (1985)

57 federal appellate · 4 district ·

330197819801990200020102020decided

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. § 113 · 18 U.S.C. § 13 (Assimilative Crimes Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 2031

Relies on United States v. District Court · Scalza v. United States · Mark Trail Camp Grounds, Inc. v. Field Enterprises, Inc. · Illinois ex rel. Kennedy v. Hurley · First National City Bank v. Banco Nacional de Cuba

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

  1. “within the ... territorial jurisdiction of the United States.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Congress has neither proscribed the specific acts committed by [this defendant] nor the generic conduct in which [he] engaged in such a way as to indicate an intent to '[cover] the field with uniform federal legislation,'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““Once the court has applied state law to determine the applicable term of years for the sentence, the Assimilative Crimes Act does not further require adherence to state policy with reference to parole eligibility.””
    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.