Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 6 F.3d 1483 - United States v. Veltmann

United States v. Veltmann’s Empirical Analysis

6 F.3d 1483 · 1993

Citation profile

77
cited by 77 later decisions
2
states following
April 2014
most recently cited

46 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 77 later decisions — most recently April 2014 · most notably United States v. Baker (2005), United States v. Edouard (2007)

46 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

310199320002010decided

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. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 844

Relies on In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Bruton v. United States · Bonner v. City of Prichard · Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory · Sullivan v. Louisiana

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

  1. “(1) an uncharged offense which arose out of the same transaction or series of transactions as the charged offense, (2) necessary to complete the story of the crime, or (3) inextricably intertwined with the evidence regarding the charged offense.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “First, the evidence must be relevant to an issue other than the defendant’s character. Second, as part of the relevance analysis, there must be sufficient proof so that a jury could find that the defendant committed the extrinsic act. Third, the evidence must possess probative value that is not substantially outweighed by its undue prejudice, and the evidence must meet the other requirements of [Federal Rule of Evidence] 403.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Then existing mental, emotional, or physical condition. A statement of the declarant’s then existing state of mind, emotion, sensation, or physical condition (such as intent, plan, motive, design, mental feeling, pain, and bodily health), but not including a statement of memory or belief to prove the fact remembered or believed unless it relates to the execution, revocation, identification, or terms of declarant’s will.”
    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.