Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 224 F.3d 741 - United States v. Beeks

United States v. Beeks’s Empirical Analysis

224 F.3d 741 · 2000

Citation profile

38
cited by 38 later decisions
1
states following
April 2024
most recently cited

25 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently April 2024 · most notably United States v. White (2001), United States v. Ziesman (2005)

25 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

260200020102020decided

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 Foss v. Foss · In re Rivera · United States v. Hernandez · United States v. Cannon · United States v. Davenport

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

  1. “Prosecutorial misconduct is grounds for a mistrial where (1) the prosecutor's remarks are improper, and (2) the remarks prejudicially affect the defendant's substantial rights so as to deprive the defendant of a fair trial.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “a single misstep on the part of the prosecutor may be so destructive of the right to a fair trial that reversal is mandated,”
    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.