Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 31 F.3d 817 - United States v. Hinton

United States v. Hinton’s Empirical Analysis

31 F.3d 817 · 1994

Citation profile

118
cited by 118 later decisions
1
states following
October 2025
most recently cited

62 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 118 later decisions — most recently October 2025 · most notably United States v. Basinger (1995), United States of America v. Vasak Sarkisian (1999)

62 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

6601994200020102020decided

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 18 U.S.C. § 113

Relies on Huddleston v. United States · Foy v. Northeast Suburban Life · Wade v. Shook · Duckworth v. Eagan · United States v. Arambula-Ruiz

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

  1. “more probable than not that the [prosecutorial] misconduct materially affected the verdict.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity or absence of mistake or accident.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “as 34 injury involving a substantial risk of death; loss or substantial impairment of the function of a bodily member, organ, or mental faculty that is likely to be permanent; or an obvious disfigurement that is likely to be permanent. In the case of a kidnapping, for example, maltreatment to a life-threatening degree (e.g., by denial of food or medical care) would constitute life-threatening bodily injury. 35 U.S.S.G. 1B1.1(h), cmt. n.1(h). A district court's determination whether a victim has sustained a”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.