United States v. Cunningham’s Empirical Analysis
133 F.3d 1070 · 1998
Citation profile
42 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently October 2024 · most notably United States v. Holloway (2002), United States of America v. Clarence Richardson Jr (2000)
42 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 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. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Ornelas v. United States · Rhode Island v. Innis · Warden, Maryland Penitentiary v. Hayden · Old Chief v. United States · Remmer 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 55 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“is justified in connection with an in-home arrest if an officer reasonably believes that the area to be swept harbors an individual posing a danger to those at the arrest scene. United States v. Cunningham, 133 F.3d 1070 , 1073 (8th Cir .), cert. denied, 118 S.Ct. 1823 (1998).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. No. 98-3583“a district court may hold a hearing to determine whether any private communication, contact, or tampering with a juror has occurred in a criminal case and, if so, whether such incident has prejudiced the defendant.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[w]hen applying this standard, we give deference to the fact finder, who had an opportunity to observe the demeanor and credibility of the witnesses.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.