Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 87 F.2d 183 - Kassin v. United States

Kassin v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

87 F.2d 183 · 1937

Citation profile

77
cited by 77 later decisions
2
states following
October 1983
most recently cited

73 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 77 later decisions — most recently October 1983 · most notably United States v. Bell (1982), State v. Shapiro (1983)

73 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

380193719401950196019701980decided

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 Dahly v. United States · Wright v. United States · Gerson v. United States · Paddock v. United States · De Luca v. United States

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

  1. “* * In each case, however, where the evidence is purely circumstantial, the links in the chain must be clearly proven, and taken together must point not to the possibility or probability, but to the moral certainty of guilt. * * * [Emphasis supplied] [Id. at 184.]”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““It was of a piece with the whole theory of the prosecution, that proof that his codefendants were guilty; that, using assumed names, appellant had registered at hotels in Florida where some of his codefendants were registered; and that he had a safety deposit box in a bank where some of his codefendants had boxes, had put him upon proof of his innocence. This will not do. Wide-sweeping and damaging as is a charge of conspiracy, difficult as it is for one caught in the net of such a charge to extricate himself from it when the government has any evidence tending to connect him with it, such a charge, no less than charges of substantive offenses, requires proof. This proof may be circumstantial or direct, or both, but it must be proof. That is, the evidence must have a legitimate tendency to compel belief in and finding of defendant’s guilt.””
    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.