United States v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
635 F.2d 716 · 1980
Citation profile
54 federal appellate · 15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 74 later decisions — most recently January 2019 · most notably United States v. Alvarez (1988), United States v. Cortez (1991)
54 federal appellate · 15 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. § 1503
Relies on Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory · Allen v. United States · Barrett v. United States · Cruz v. Hauck · Gotthelf v. Commissioner
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 74 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a word of common usage and thus within the ordinary understanding of a juror.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In the course of your deliberations, the jurors should not hesitate to reexamine his own views and change his opinion, if convinced it is erroneous. Each juror who finds himself to be in the minority, should reconsider his views, in the light of the opinion of the jurors to the majority. If much the greater number of you are for a particular conclusion, each dissenting juror ought to consider whether his or her position is a reasonable one....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“In particular we note that the district court expressly recognized the possibility that a majority of the jurors may have favored acquittal, that the government has the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, that the majority as well as the minority should reexamine their positions, that no juror was to yield a conscientiously held conviction, and that the jurors could continue to deliberate as long as they required.”
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.