United States v. Field’s Empirical Analysis
625 F.2d 862 · 1980
Citation profile
77 federal appellate · 2 district · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 118 later decisions — most recently December 2015 · most notably Jeffries v. Wood (1997), Tuan Van Tran v. Gary Lindsey Salinas Valley State Prisons (2000)
77 federal appellate · 2 district · 12 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. § 2113
Relies on Simmons v. United States · Neil v. Biggers · Stovall v. Denno · Manson v. Brathwaite · Coleman v. Alabama
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 118 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““For the purpose of attacking the credibility of a witness, evidence that he has been convicted of a crime shall be admitted if elicited from him or established by public record during cross-examination but only if the crime (1) was punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of one year under the law under which he was convicted, and the court determines that the probative value of admitting this evidence outweighs its prejudicial effect to the defendant, or (2) involved dishonesty or false statement, regardless of the punishment.””
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the product of observations at the time of the crime”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.””
3 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.