Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 27 F.3d 1186 - United States v. Johnson

United States v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

27 F.3d 1186 · 1994

Citation profile

161
cited by 161 later decisions
7
states following
June 2025
most recently cited

84 federal appellate · 12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 161 later decisions — most recently June 2025 · most notably United States v. Spikes (1998), United States v. Abboud (2006)

84 federal appellate · 12 state decisions

6301994200020102020decided

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

Applies 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)

Relies on Huddleston v. United States · Dade County v. Lake Lucerne Civic Ass'n · Dade County v. Lake Lucerne Civic Ass'n · Brendale v. Confederated Tribes & Bands of the Yakima Indian Nation · Eli Lilly & Co. v. Medtronic, Inc.

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

  1. “[i]n prosecuting specific intent crimes, prior acts evidence may often be the only method of proving intent. [citation omitted] Thus, where the crime charged is one requiring specific intent, the prosecutor may use 404(b) evidence to prove that the defendant acted with the specific intent notwithstanding any defense the defendant might raise.”
    16 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[w]hen jurors hear that a defendant has on earlier occasions committed essentially the same crime as that for which he is on trial, the information unquestionably has a powerful and prejudicial impact.”
    11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the specific factor named in the rule that is relied upon to justify admission of the other acts evidence, explain why the factor is material, and warn the jurors against using the evidence to draw”
    8 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.