United States v. Ackerman’s Empirical Analysis
704 F.2d 1344 · 1983
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently February 2012 · most notably 41 Cal. 3d 714 - People v. Figueroa (1986), United States v. Johnson (1983)
17 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 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. § 1001 (Comprehensive Thrift and Bank Fraud Prosecution and Taxpayer Recovery Act of 1990) · 18 U.S.C. § 542 · 19 U.S.C. § 1592 (Tariff Act of 1930)
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Jackson v. Denno · Rhode Island v. Innis · Rideout v. United States · Fahy v. Connecticut
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We hold, however, that the materiality requirement of § 542 involves a legal issue to be decided by the court. This interpretation of the statute conforms to that given to 18 U.S.C. § 1001 , which proscribes the making of false statements to government agencies. As with § 542, the courts have read a requirement of materiality into § 1001 .... Under § 1001, “[t]he materiality of a statement rests upon a factual evidentia-ry showing but the ultimate decision is a legal one.” United States v. Beer, 518 F.2d 168, 172 (5th Cir.1975). Likewise, under § 542, the ultimate decision as to whether a false statement is material is a legal rather than a factual issue.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he special procedural safeguards outlined in Miranda are required not where a suspect is simply taken into custody, but rather where a suspect in custody is subjected to interrogation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“whoever ... attempts to enter or introduce, into the commerce of the United States any imported merchandise by means of any fraudulent or false ... affidavit ...”
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.