Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 645 F.2d 461 - United States v. Grissom

United States v. Grissom’s Empirical Analysis

645 F.2d 461 · 1981

Citation profile

108
cited by 108 later decisions
2
states following
May 2017
most recently cited

99 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 108 later decisions — most recently May 2017 · most notably United States v. Angiulo (1990), United States v. Harrelson (1985)

99 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

6201981199020002010decided

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

Relies on United States v. Rabinowitz · United States v. Bass · Bell v. United States · Apex Hosiery Co. v. Leader · Rewis v. United States

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

  1. “the instruction (1) is substantively correct; (2) was not substantially covered in the charge actually delivered to the jury; and (3) concerns an important point in the trial so that the failure to give it seriously impaired the defendant's ability to effectively present a given defense.”
    16 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “It would be unfair and illogical to subject [defendant] to punishment of up to five years in jail for committing a federal felony offense, if, in fact, he intended to commit only a state misdemeanor — punishable by a maximum of six months in jail — merely because the crops used to commit the state misdemeanor happened to be mortgaged to the FHA.... [I]t violates common sense to allow the government to punish [defendant] in this case, absent a finding that [he] both defrauded and intended to defraud the government.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[w]hoever, with intent to defraud, knowingly conceals, removes, disposes of, or converts to his own use or to that of another, any property mortgaged or pledged to, or held by, ... the Secretary of Agriculture acting through the Farmers' Home Administration....”
    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.