United States v. Looking’s Empirical Analysis
156 F.3d 803 · 1998
Citation profile
32 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently December 2015 · most notably United States v. Allen (2001), United States v. James (2003)
32 federal appellate · 1 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. § 113 · 18 U.S.C. § 1151 (Indian Crimes Act of 1976) · 18 U.S.C. § 1153 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 636
Relies on Ornelas v. United States · United States v. Hasting · United States v. Lane · Total Foods v. Alix · United States v. Plenty Arrows
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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]here the defendant fails to file timely objections to the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, the factual conclusions underlying that defendant's appeal are reviewed for plain error.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“A ruling on admissibility will not be reversed on appeal absent a clear and prejudicial abuse of discretion.”
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.