United States v. Combs’s Empirical Analysis
762 F.2d 1343 · 1985
Citation profile
43 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently October 2008 · most notably United States v. Weiland (2005), United States v. Disla (1986)
43 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.
Relationships
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 5845 (§ 201 of the Gun Control Act of 1968)
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Stirone v. United States · United States v. Miller · Barefoot v. Estelle · Drews v. Maryland
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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“instruct the jury on all the essential elements of the crime charged.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Extrinsic evidence of authenticity as a condition precedent to admissibility is not required with respect to ... (1) Domestic public documents under seal. A document bearing a seal purporting to be that of the United States, or of any State, ... and a signature purporting to be an attestation or execution.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Pertinent areas of inquiry include the language used by the officer to summon the individual, the extent to which he or she is confronted with evidence of guilt, the physical surroundings of the interrogation, the duration of the detention and the degree of pressure applied to detain the individual.”
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.