United States v. Stern’s Empirical Analysis
13 F.3d 489 · 1994
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently May 2014
14 federal appellate · 3 district ·
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. § 1001 (Comprehensive Thrift and Bank Fraud Prosecution and Taxpayer Recovery Act of 1990) · 18 U.S.C. § 3500 · 18 U.S.C. § 3663 · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 18 U.S.C. § 494 · 18 U.S.C. § 495
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Bagley · Carnegie v. United States · United States v. Powell · Kuntz v. City of Dayton
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“where a sentence is vacated and remanded for redetermination under correct principles, the government is not automatically foreclosed from offering evidence pertinent to the newly established rule.”
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.