United States v. McElroy’s Empirical Analysis
644 F.2d 274 · 1981
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2016
7 federal appellate · 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.
Appellate journey
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 10 · 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 2311 (Anti Car Theft Act of 1992) · 18 U.S.C. § 2312 · 18 U.S.C. § 2314 · 18 U.S.C. § 2315 · 18 U.S.C. § 659
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Glasser v. United States · Burks v. United States · Pereira v. United States · United States v. Bass
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A]ssuming the presence of the requisite knowledge and guilty purpose, any driving, whether wholly within the state of origin, state of destination, or from and to, if done as a substantial step in the furtherance of the intended interstate journey is ... we think, within the act.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“It is immaterial whether the signatures were forged in Ohio or in Pennsylvania. If at any point in the interstate movement the check was in a forged condition, the statute was satisfied.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[m]ost opinions hold that the interstate commerce requirement is satisfied if, after the defendant negotiates a forged check, it travels interstate in the bank collection process”
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.