United States v. Blake’s Empirical Analysis
941 F.2d 334 · 1991
Citation profile
39 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2011 · most notably United States v. Tomblin (1995), United States v. Thomas (1994)
39 federal appellate · 1 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. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 26 U.S.C. § 5861 (§ 201 of the Gun Control Act of 1968)
Relies on Missouri v. Continential Insurance Cos. · Huddleston v. United States · California State Board of Equalization v. Western Marina Corp. · Santoni v. United States · Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Newman Oil Co.
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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Specific instances of the conduct of a witness, for the purpose of attacking or supporting the witness' credibility ... may, however, in the discretion of the court, if probative of truthfulness or untruthfulness, be inquired into on cross-examination of the witness (1) concerning the witness' character for truthfulness or untruthfulness ....”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“that the weapon involved could have been used to protect, facilitate, or have the potential of facilitating the operation, and [that] the presence of the weapon was in some way connected with the drug trafficking'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident-””
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.