United States v. Maloney’s Empirical Analysis
607 F.2d 222 · 1979
Citation profile
25 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently September 2024 · most notably United States v. Bell (1982), Valansi v. Ashcroft (2002)
25 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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. § 1111 · 18 U.S.C. § 1151 (Indian Crimes Act of 1976) · 18 U.S.C. § 1152 · 18 U.S.C. § 1153 · 18 U.S.C. § 2031 · 18 U.S.C. § 2113 · 18 U.S.C. § 3242 · 18 U.S.C. § 661
Relies on Morissette v. United States · Houltin v. United States · Keeble v. United States · United States v. Kagama · United States v. Turley
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[w]hoever, within the special ... territorial jurisdiction of the United States, takes and carries away, with intent to steal or purloin, any personal property of another shall be punished as follows: If the property taken is of a value exceeding $100, ... by a fine of not more than $5,000, or imprisonment for not more than five years, or both; in all other cases, by a fine of not more than $1,000, or by imprisonment not more than one year, or both.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“one must initially turn to a specific federal statute which 'defines and punishes' [an offense listed in section 1153] or, if no federal law has been enacted covering the offense, to the laws of the state wherein the crime was committed”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he purpose of Congress [in passing section 1153] was simply to punish Indians like other individuals under the same federal or territorial laws which govern the Indian country when they commit any of the enumerated offenses.”
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.