United States v. Stephens’s Empirical Analysis
779 F.2d 232 · 1985
Citation profile
39 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently July 2013 · most notably United States v. Duncan (1990), United States v. Faulkner (1994)
39 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. § 1014 · 18 U.S.C. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002)
Relies on Glasser v. United States · Stafford v. Oklahoma · Amperex Electronic Corp. v. New York Racing Assn., Inc. · Bell v. United States · Texas v. Louisiana
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.
“In evaluating the sufficiency of the evidence supporting a conviction, we must interpret the evidence in the light most favorable to the government. We must resolve all conflicts in the evidence in favor of the government, and we must give the government the benefit of every inference which might reasonably be made from the evidence when it is construed favorably to the government. Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60 , 62 S.Ct. 457 , 469, 86 L.Ed. 680 (1942). Stephens, 779 F.2d at 235 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he contents of voluminous writings, recordings, or photographs which cannot conveniently be examined in court may be presented in the form of a chart, summary, or calculation.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he fact that the underlying documents are already in evidence does not mean that they can be 'conveniently examined in court.'”
2 later decisions 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.