Perez v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
297 F.2d 12 · 1961
Citation profile
137 federal appellate · 9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 154 later decisions — most recently June 2016 · most notably United States v. Hoffa (1965), United States v. Alvarez (1985)
137 federal appellate · 9 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 Tatum v. United States · United Gas Pipe Line Co. v. Mobile Gas Service Corp. · Olender v. United States · Williams 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 154 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(I)n no condition of proof is it permissible to leave with the jury the idea that it had become the duty of the defendant to establish his innocence to obtain an acquittal.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““It is elementary law that the defendant in a criminal case is entitled to have presented instructions relating to a theory of defense for which there is any foundation in the evidence. * * A charge is erroneous which ignores a claimed defense with such a foundation. * * * The charge to which he is entitled, upon proper request, in such circumstances is one which precisely and specifically, rather than merely generally or abstractly, points to his theory of defense, * * * and one which does not unduly emphasize the theory of the prosecution, thereby de-emphasizing proportionally the defendant’s theory.” (Citations omitted) ( 297 F.2d at 12, 15, 16 )”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The ultimate question is 'whether the charge taken as a whole was such as to confuse or leave an erroneous impression in the minds of the jurors.'”
3 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.