United States v. Lamberty’s Empirical Analysis
778 F.2d 59 · 1985
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently April 2022
11 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 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. § 1703 · 18 U.S.C. § 1709
Relies on Goff v. Continental Oil Co. · United States v. Hall · Tucker v. Zant
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We do not find that the evidence introduced to show the government's motive in setting the trap is in any way relevant to proving the elements of the counts charged. While the jurors may have been curious as to why the inspectors began their operation, enlightenment on this matter had no probative value.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Evidence is relevant if it has any tendency to make the existence of any fact consequential to the determination of the action more or less probable.”
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.