Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 28 F.3d 921 - United States v. Rincon

United States v. Rincon’s Empirical Analysis

28 F.3d 921 · 1994

Citation profile

104
cited by 104 later decisions
7
states following
September 2024
most recently cited

47 federal appellate · 10 district · 8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 104 later decisions — most recently September 2024 · most notably Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (1995), United States v. Hall (1999)

47 federal appellate · 10 district · 8 state decisions

6101994200020102020decided

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 Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. · Frye v. United States · Lord Electric Co. v. United States · Liberty Mortgage Co. v. Frey · Utility Contractors, Inc. v. United States

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

  1. “Daubert in no way altered the discretion that resides with the district court judge to determine whether such evidence is properly admitted.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[i]f scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.”
    2 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.