United States v. Feroni’s Empirical Analysis
655 F.2d 707 · 1981
Citation profile
33 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2113 · 18 U.S.C. § 2312 · 18 U.S.C. § 2314 · 18 U.S.C. § 371
Relies on Houltin v. United States · Angrist v. United States · United States v. Turley · Federal Trade Commission v. Mandel Bros. · Parham v. J. L.
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In the bank situation we ee no reason, urgent or otherwise, why Congress in 1937 should have wanted to enter the field of obtaining by false pretenses, duplicating state law which was adequate and effectively enforced, and the duplication of which would bring innumerable cases, most of them small, within the jurisdiction of federal prosecutors and courts. Congress was as aware in 1937 as it was in 1934, when it rejected the unambiguous provision making obtaining by false pretense from a bank a federal crime, that such an extension of federal law would serve no purpose except to confuse and dilute state responsibility for local crimes which were being adequately dealt with by state law.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Even if the trial court's failure to give a curative instruction had been error, we hold that such error was harmless. It is clear that the error alleged [prejudicial testimony of defendant's prior criminal conduct] is subject to the harmless error rule.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““[S]tolen” and “steal” have been used in federal criminal statutes, and the courts interpreting those words have declared that they do not have a necessary common-law meaning coterminous with larceny and exclusive of other theft crimes. Freed from a common-law meaning, we should give “stolen” the meaning consistent with the context in which it appears.”
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.