United States v. Patterson’s Empirical Analysis
20 F.3d 809 · 1994
Citation profile
34 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently March 2023 · most notably United States v. Edwards (1995), United States v. Hardwell (1996)
34 federal appellate · 2 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. § 2312 · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 49 U.S.C. § 46502
Relies on Neil v. Biggers · United States v. Young · Huddleston v. United States · National Union Fire Insurance v. Helfand · United States v. Abel
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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the evidence must be offered for a proper purpose; (2) the evidence must be relevant; (3) the trial court must make a Rule 403 determination of whether the probative value of the similar acts is substantially outweighed by its potential for unfair prejudice; and (4) pursuant to Fed. R.Evid. 105, the trial court shall, upon request, instruct the jury that evidence of similar acts is to be considered only for the proper purpose for which it was admitted.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“for 16 years. Wooldridge was found guilty on all counts. He now appeals his conviction. III. 8 We review a district court's decision to admit or exclude evidence under Rule 404(b) only for an abuse of discretion. If the court did not make”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Evidence of prior bad acts will always be prejudicial, and it is the trial court's job to evaluate whether the guaranteed risk of prejudice outweighs the legitimate contribution of the evidence.”
2 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.