United States v. Henry’s Empirical Analysis
113 F.3d 37 · 1997
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently November 2016
4 federal appellate · 3 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. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Boykin v. Alabama · Brady v. United States · Kercheval v. United States · United States v. Jackson · American Sterilizer Co. v. Sybron Corp.
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“As for the rule’s several injunctions that the trial judge personally address or inform the defendant of matters, a colloquy conducted exclusively by the judge is not required, although it is the best practice. It will usually suffice, however, that the judge dominate the inquiry and involve himself personally in it ... We do not think the spirit or the letter of the rule require that the judge be sole orator or lector, especially where multiple charges and defendants are concerned. Judges, too, get sore throats. The courts in general have been clear that Rule 11 ‘is not to be read as requiring a litany or other ritual which can be carried out only by word-for-word adherence to a set “script.” ’ Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, October 1981, p. 26 reprinted in 91 F.R.D. 289 , 326. See also 1 Wright, Federal Practice and Procedure, § 178, at 673 “Just as ‘mere ritual does not suffice for compliance with Rule 11,’ so too ‘ritualistic compliance is not required.’ ””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““(5) . . . that he . . . has the right ... to confront and cross-examine witnesses against him . . . .””
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.