Connors v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

252 federal appellate · 17 district · 118 state decisions

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 504 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “is conducted under the supervision of the court, and a great deal must, of necessity, be left to its sound discretion.”

   18 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Richards v. United States · Murphy v. United States

2. ““There is no ground whatever to suppose that the accused was taken by surprise in the progress of the trial, or that he was in doubt as to what was the precise offense with which he was charged.””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Wright v. United States · May v. United States

3. “In the absence of any statement tending to show that there was some special reason or ground for putting that question to particular jurors called into the jury box for examination, it cannot be said that the court erred in disallowing it. If the previous examination of a juror on his voir dire or the statements of counsel, or any facts brought to the attention of the court, had indicated that the juror might, or possibly would, be influenced in giving a verdict by his political surroundings, we would not say that the court could not properly, in its discretion, if it had regarded the circumstances as excep tional, have permitted the inquiry whether the juror’s political affiliations or party predilections would bias his judgment as a juror. But no such exceptional circumstances are disclosed by the record, and the court might well have deemed the question, unaccompanied by any statement showing a necessity for propounding it, as an idle one that had no material bearing upon the inquiry as to the qualifications of the juror, and as designed only to create the impression that the interests of the political party to which the accused belonged were involved in the trial. The public should not be taught, by the mode in which trials of this character are conducted, that the prosecution of a crime against the laws securing the freedom and integrity of elections for representatives in congress will be regarded by the court as, in effect, a prosecution of a political party to which t”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 491 F. Supp. 1048 - United States v. Furey · Thomas v. Hardwick