United States v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
591 F.3d 974 · 2010
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1153
Relies on United States v. McMillan · United States v. Hiland · Burlington Northern Railroad v. Nebraska · Roberts v. Hollocher · United States v. Womochil
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) rationally based on the perception of the witness, (b) helpful to a clear understanding of the witness' [s] testimony or the determination of a fact in issue, and (c) not based on scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge within the scope of [CRE] 702.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) the statement has equivalent circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness to the other hearsay exceptions; (2) the statement is offered as evidence of a material fact; (3) the statement is more probative on the point for which it is offered than any other evidence which the proponent can procure through reasonable efforts; (4) the general purposes of the rules and the interests of justice will best be served by its admission; and (5) adequate notice must be given to the opposing party.”
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.