United States v. Magleby’s Empirical Analysis
241 F.3d 1306 · 2001
Citation profile
49 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 83 later decisions — most recently July 2024 · most notably Planned Parenthood of the Columbia/Willamette, Inc. v. American Coalition of Life Activists (2002), United States v. Lawrence (2005)
49 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 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 United States v. Olano · Kotteakos v. United States · Johnson v. United States · Watts v. United States · United States v. Guest
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 83 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'an undue tendency to suggest decision on an improper basis, commonly, though not necessarily, an emotional one.'”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage“it does not matter that the defendant may have had more than one motive in performing the act as long as . . . race was one of his motives”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“In reviewing his sufficiency of the evidence claims, we must ask only whether taking the evidence-both direct and circumstantial, together with the reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom-in the light most favorable to the government, a reasonable jury could find [the defendant] guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.... We will only overturn a jury verdict if no reasonable juror could have reached the disputed verdict.... In a sufficiency challenge, we review the record as a whole and consider the collective inferences reasonably drawn therefrom. Where conflicting evidence exists, we do not question the jury’s conclusions regarding the credibility of witnesses or the relative weight of evidence. When a record allows for conflicting findings, we must presume that the trier of fact resolved any such conflicts in favor of the prosecution.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.