United States v. Cox’s Empirical Analysis
593 F.2d 46 · 1979
Citation profile
29 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently April 2017 · most notably United States v. Washington (1983), United States v. Schrock (1988)
29 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
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. § 1542
Relies on Browder v. United States · United States v. Jones · United States v. Monasterski · 71 Mich. App. 213 - Piotrowski v. Piotrowski
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“False statement in application and use of passport Whoever willfully and knowingly makes any false statement in an application for passport with intent to induce or secure the issuance of a passport under the authority of the United States, either for his own use or the use of another, contrary to the laws regulating the issuance of passports or the rules prescribed pursuant to such laws; or Whoever willfully and knowingly uses or attempts to use, or furnishes to another for use any passport the issue of which was secured in any way by reason of any false statement—”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The gravamen of the offense . . . is the making of a false statement.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the evidence is insufficient to sustain a conviction.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Guthrie
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.