United States of America v. Dennis McClatchey’s Empirical Analysis
217 F.3d 823 · 2000
Citation profile
49 federal appellate · 16 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 227 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2023 · most notably United States of America v. Marion Promise (2001), O'Connell v. Shalala (2000)
49 federal appellate · 16 district · 8 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
Relies on Pinkerton v. United States · United States Postal Service Board of Governors v. Aikens · Dunn v. United States · Lincoln v. Sunn
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 227 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“of the Third Circuit in Greber. Id. In this appeal, the government claims defendants' challenges to Instructions #32 and 33 are foreclosed by the stare decisis effect of McClatchey, the Act as construed by McClatchey is not void for vagueness under due process, and, therefore, defendants are not entitled to a new trial based on the jury instructions. We agree with the government. 12 51”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the panel partly based its decision that the attorney variance did not prejudice [Mr.] McClatchey on the erroneous premise that the jury 'was not informed that the district court had acquitted the attorney defendants' and therefore could not conclude he must have been guilty because the court had not acquitted him too”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Whether a variance between an indictment and the case presented at trial is sufficiently prejudicial to warrant a new trial is a question of law.... A new trial is only necessary, however, if the variance substantially prejudiced the defendant's right to a fair trial.”
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.