Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 772 F.2d 1339 - United States v. Davis

United States v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis

772 F.2d 1339 · 1985

Citation profile

57
cited by 57 later decisions
3
states following
April 2011
most recently cited

47 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently April 2011 · most notably United States v. Briscoe (1990), United States v. Nesbitt (1988)

47 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

3401985199020002010decided

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. § 20 · 18 U.S.C. § 495

Relies on Chambers v. Mississippi · Washington v. Texas · United States v. Valenzuela-Bernal · Mansion House Center South Redevelopment Co. v. United States · Jones v. Howard

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

  1. “A person is not responsible for criminal conduct if at the time of such conduct as a result of mental disease or defect he lacks substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of law.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “”[I]t does not seem to us enough to show that gambling is compulsive (the result of an irresistible impulse), money is necessary for gambling and therefore the stealing of money is equally 'compulsive.’ The stealing may follow as a matter of logic or means-end reasoning but this in itself should not necessarily result in a psychiatric characterization of the act of stealing as 'compulsive.’ ” Davis, 772 F.2d at 1347 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.”
    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.