United States v. Farley’s Empirical Analysis
992 F.2d 1122 · 1993
Citation profile
26 federal appellate · 6 district · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently November 2024 · most notably United States v. Tome (1995), State v. Kelley (2000)
26 federal appellate · 6 district · 10 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. § 2241 (Amber Hagerman Child Protection Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 3509 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291
Relies on Ohio v. Roberts · Illinois v. Allen · Bourjaily v. United States · Maryland v. Craig · Mattox 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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“... Rule 803(24) should be used only 'in extraordinary circumstances where the court is satisfied that the evidence offers guarantees of trustworthiness and is material, probative and necessary in the interest of justice.'”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“18 U.S.C. § 3509 was promulgated, specifying the procedures to be used in federal courts to allow a child victim to testify via closed circuit.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“was clearly not offered for the truth of the matter asserted”
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.