Dirring v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
353 F.2d 519 · 1965
Citation profile
28 federal appellate · 4 district · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently November 2024 · most notably United States v. Whitebird (1995), Wayne Hudson v. Kenneth L. Hardy (1968)
28 federal appellate · 4 district · 12 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. § 3006A (Criminal Justice Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 753
Relies on Smith v. Crouse · United States v. Johnson · Fisher v. United States · Etchieson v. Texas · United States v. Johnson
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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he weakest sort of evidence, and the district court, which conducted the original trial, was certainly within its discretion in disbelieving it. Indeed, if a new trial could be predicated as of right upon a co-defendant’s change of heart after a failure to take the stand there could always be a second chance for everyone.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“a federally convicted defendant is not entitled under the Criminal Justice Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A, or the Sixth Amendment, to appointment of counsel on a motion for a new trial.”
1 later decision 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.