United States v. Caputo’s Empirical Analysis
808 F.2d 963 · 1987
Citation profile
29 federal appellate · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 68 later decisions — most recently July 2021 · most notably United States v. Pitre (1992), United States v. Paccione (1991)
29 federal appellate · 5 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. § 1029
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Katz v. United States · Darden v. Wainwright · Kimmelman v. Morrison · Smith 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 68 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(e) As used in this section— (1) the term “access device” means any card, plate, code, account number, or other means of account access that can be used, alone or in conjunction with another access device to obtain money, goods, services, or any other thing of value, or that can be used to initiate a transfer of funds (other than a transfer originated solely by paper instrument). # jji sji (3) the term “unauthorized access device” means any access device that is lost, stolen, expired, revoked, canceled, or obtained with intent to defraud.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“proof or motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“any access device that is lost, stolen, expired, revoked, canceled, or obtained with intent to defraud.”
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.