United States v. Combs’s Empirical Analysis
267 F.3d 1167 · 2001
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 8 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently July 2023 · most notably United States v. Summers (2005), United States v. Avery (2002)
10 federal appellate · 8 district · 2 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 Brady v. State of Maryland · Apprendi v. New Jersey · Almendarez-Torres v. United States · United States v. Bagley · United States v. Agurs
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'duty to learn of any favorable evidence known to the others acting on the government's behalf in the case, including the police’”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) the evidence was discovered after trial; (2) the failure to learn of the evidence was not caused by his own lack of diligence; (3) the new evidence is not merely impeaching; (4) the new evidence is material to the principal issues involved; and (5) the new evidence is of such a nature that in a new trial it would probably produce an acquittal.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[o]ther than the fact of a prior conviction, any fact that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury, and proved beyond a reasonable doubt.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hawkins v. Gibson
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.