Cephus v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
324 F.2d 893 · 1963
Citation profile
138 federal appellate · 5 district · 59 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 220 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2024 · most notably McGautha v. California (1971), United States v. Polizzi (1974)
138 federal appellate · 5 district · 59 state decisions — followed in 19 states
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 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1292
Relies on Glidden Company v. Zdanok Et Al. · Coppedge v. United States · Watts v. Indiana · Johnson v. Stevenson · Curley 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 220 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“we need not here question the entire waiver doctrine in criminal cases. We need only question its application based upon the defendant's response to damaging testimony of a co-defendant testifying on his own behalf.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“(o)ne of the greatest safeguards for the individual under our system of criminal justice”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“"Motions for directed verdict are abolished and motions for judgment of acquittal shall be used in their place. The court on motion of a defendant or of its own motion shall order the entry of judgment of acquittal of one or more offenses charged in the indictment or information after the evidence on either side is closed if the evidence is insufficient to sustain a conviction of such offense or offenses. If a defendant's motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of the evidence offered by the State is not granted, the defendant may offer evidence without having reserved the right."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.