Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 845 F.2d 170 - United States v. Elem

United States v. Elem’s Empirical Analysis

845 F.2d 170 · 1988

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
1
states following
June 2014
most recently cited

29 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently June 2014 · most notably United States v. Carey (1990), Hicks v. Brown Group, Inc. (1990)

29 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

2501988199020002010decided

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

Relies on United States v. Robinson · United States v. Moore · United States v. Boykin · United States v. Viera · United States v. Rush

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

  1. “A spontaneous exclamation may be defined as a statement or exclamation made immediately after some exciting occasion by a participant or spectator and asserting the circumstances of that occasion as it is observed by him. The admissibility of such exclamation is based on our experience that, under certain external circumstances of physical or mental shock, a stress of nervous excitement may be produced in a spectator which stills the reflective faculties and removes their control, so that the utterance which then occurs is a spontaneous and sincere response to the actual sensations and perceptions already produced by the external shock. Since this utterance is made under the immediate and uncontrolled domination of the senses, rather than reason and reflection, and during the brief period when consideration of self-interest could not have been fully brought to bear, the utterance may be taken as expressing the real belief of the speaker as to the facts just observed by him. ¡k 4= % 4* s¡c The true test in spontaneous exclamations is not when the exclamation was made, but whether under all the circumstances of the particular exclamation the speaker may be considered as speaking under the stress of nervous excitement and shock produced by the act in issue * * *.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[T]he decision whether to grant a mistrial, which is a very drastic remedy, lies within the sound discretion of the district court.”
    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.