Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 934 F.2d 1163 - United States v. Fingado

United States v. Fingado’s Empirical Analysis

934 F.2d 1163 · 1991

Citation profile

51
cited by 51 later decisions
1
states following
September 2015
most recently cited

39 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently September 2015 · most notably United States v. Willie (1991), United States v. McIntyre (1993)

39 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

430199120002010decided

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 26 U.S.C. § 7203

Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Huddleston v. United States · Mahan & Rowsey, Inc. v. Oklahoma Natural Gas · Pelaes v. United States · Cheek 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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “As it relates to Count One, you may find that a defendant had knowledge of a fact if you find that the defendant deliberately closed his eyes to what would otherwise have been obvious to him. While knowledge on the part of the defendant cannot be established merely by demonstrating that the defendant was negligent, careless, or foolish, knowledge can be inferred if the defendant deliberately blinded himself to the existence of a fact.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[t]he record supports a finding that Fingado was aware of a high probability that his understanding of the tax laws was erroneous and consciously avoided obtaining actual knowledge of his obligations.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “‘substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury’s verdict.’”
    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.