United States v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis
116 F.3d 606 · 1997
Citation profile
77 federal appellate · 6 district · 59 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 206 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2025 · most notably United States v. Thomas (2001), United States v. McVeigh (1998)
77 federal appellate · 6 district · 59 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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
Relies on Batson v. Kentucky · Delaware v. Van Arsdall · Witherspoon v. Illinois · Missouri v. Continential Insurance Cos. · Adams v. United States Ex Rel. McCann
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 206 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A] court may not delve deeply into a juror's motivations because it may not intrude on the secrecy of the jury's deliberations.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“Where the duty and authority to prevent defiant disregard of the law or evidence comes into conflict with the principle of secret jury deliberations, we are compelled to err in favor of the lesser of two evilsprotecting the secrecy of jury deliberations at the expense of possibly allowing irresponsible juror activity.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“categorically reject[ing] the idea that, in a society committed to the rule of law, jury nullification is desirable or that courts may permit it to occur when it is within their authority to prevent”
7 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.