United States v. Francisco’s Empirical Analysis
35 F.3d 116 · 1994
Citation profile
45 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 91 later decisions — most recently July 2013 · most notably United States v. Ellis (1997), United States v. Johnson (2009)
45 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3572 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Donnelly v. DeChristoforo · Darden v. Wainwright · Richardson v. Marsh · Easter House v. United States · Mansell v. Mansell
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 91 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he test for reversible prosecutorial misconduct has two elements: (1) whether the prosecutor's remarks or conduct was improper, and (2) whether such remarks or conduct prejudicially affected the defendant's substantial rights so as to deprive [him] of a fair trial.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“so infected the trial with unfairness as to make the resulting conviction a denial of due process.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“It is well-settled that decisions regarding the admission and exclusion of evidence are peculiarly within the province of the district court, not to be reversed on appeal absent an abuse of discretion. [A]ny error in [the] admission or exclusion [of evidence] is subject to the harmless error test.”
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.