Full text not available for this opinion.
Staples v. United States
511 U.S. 600 · Supreme Court of the United States · Decided May 23, 1994
Cited by (1,810)
Most-cited subsequent opinions citing this case. The full citation network — every citing opinion with the citing passages — is available on the MayaClerk platform.
- Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998)
- Old Chief v. United States, 519 U.S. 172 (1997)
- United States v. Gaudin, 515 U.S. 506 (1995)
- Jones v. United States, 526 U.S. 227 (1999)
- Rehaif v. United States, 588 U.S. 225 (2019)
- Staples v. United States, 511 U.S. 600 (1994)
- United States v. X-Citement Video, Inc., 513 U.S. 64 (1994)
- National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, 132 S. Ct. 2566 (2012)
- Muscarello v. United States, 524 U.S. 125 (1998)
- Osterberg v. Peca, 12 S.W.3d 31 (2000) · on the MayaClerk platform
This opinion cites
- Connecticut National Bank v. Germain, 503 U.S. 249 (1992)
- Morissette v. United States, 342 U.S. 246 (1952)
- Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973)
- Cannon v. University of Chicago, 441 U.S. 677 (1979)
- United States v. Bass, 404 U.S. 336 (1971)
- Lorillard v. Pons, 434 U.S. 575 (1978)
- Staples v. United States, 511 U.S. 600 (1994)
- Smith v. United States, 508 U.S. 223 (1993)
- Chapman v. United States, 500 U.S. 453 (1991)
- United States v. Bailey, 444 U.S. 394 (1980)
- United States v. United States Gypsum Co., 438 U.S. 422 (1978)
- Cheek v. United States, 498 U.S. 192 (1991)
- Ratzlaf v. United States, 510 U.S. 135 (1994)
- Liparota v. United States, 471 U.S. 419 (1985)
- United States v. Dotterweich, 320 U.S. 277 (1943)
Research Staples v. United States with AI
Search 10.6 million opinions, walk the full citation graph with passages, and get cited answers from an AI research assistant. Free tier: 40 searches/month, no card required.
Create a free accountFull text of the opinion
Source: public court records. Text provided as published by the court; formatting may differ from the official reporter. This page is legal information, not legal advice.