Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 683 F.2d 273 - United States v. Foley

United States v. Foley’s Empirical Analysis

683 F.2d 273 · 1982

Citation profile

40
cited by 40 later decisions
4
states following
March 2016
most recently cited

30 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently March 2016 · most notably United States v. Ismail (1985), Wilmington v. J.I. Case Co. (1986)

30 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

2901982199020002010decided

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 Delli Paoli v. United States · Federal Election Commission v. Machinists Non-Partisan Political League · Greene v. Massey · Abujasen v. United States · Pennhurst State School & Hospital v. Halderman

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

  1. “General Rule. 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....”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “The weighing of probative value against prejudicial effect [under Rule 609(b) ] is committed to the sound discretion of the trial court.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “substantially outweighs its prejudicial effect,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.