United States v. Ladd’s Empirical Analysis
218 F.3d 701 · 2000
Citation profile
5 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Relies on Napue v. People of the State of Illinois · Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia · Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc. · Press-Enterprise Company v. Superior Court of California Riverside County · Don Vicente Macias, Inc. v. Texas Gulf Trawling Co.
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“For coconspirator statements to be admitted pursuant to Rule 801(d)(2)(E), the Government must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that a conspiracy existed, that both the declarant and the defendant were members of the conspiracy, and that the statements were made in the course and in furtherance of the conspiracy.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“A statement is not hearsay if . . . (2) The statement is offered against a party and is . . . (E) a statement by a coconspirator of a party during the course and in furtherance of the conspiracy.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.