Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 284 F.2d 310 - United States v. Lefkowitz

United States v. Lefkowitz’s Empirical Analysis

284 F.2d 310 · 1960

Citation profile

124
cited by 124 later decisions
6
states following
July 2014
most recently cited

103 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 124 later decisions — most recently July 2014 · most notably United States v. Mandel (1979), United States v. Somers (1974)

103 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

600196019701980199020002010decided

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 Bollenbach v. United States · Wilson v. United States · Bryan v. United States · Barfield v. United States · United States v. Sherman

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

  1. “[w]e do not regard the failure of Dryja's counsel to except as barring Dryja from seeking reversal for error in the charge; Lefkowitz's exception called the matter to the judge's attention and further exception would have been fruitless”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““The burden of proof rests upon the Government throughout the- case,” and, “Bear in mind * * * the burden of proof is always on the Government,” and repeated the “burden of explaining” language of the charge. The court of Appeals held that the error in the charge was not corrected by reemphasizing'that the “burden of proof is always on the Government.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““the question is whether, taking all the evidence, this was ‘substantial enough to establish a case from which the jury may infer guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.’ ” (Italics Added.)”
    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.