Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 359 F.2d 990 - Cupo v. United States

Cupo v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

359 F.2d 990 · 1966

Citation profile

113
cited by 113 later decisions
6
states following
January 2019
most recently cited

73 federal appellate · 12 district · 16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 113 later decisions — most recently January 2019 · most notably Baker v. United States (1968), People v. Massie (1967)

73 federal appellate · 12 district · 16 state decisions

510196619701980199020002010decided

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. § 371

Relies on Glidden Company v. Zdanok Et Al. · Aldridge v. United States · Chandler v. Occidental Petroleum Corp. · Oliphant v. Atlantic Coast Line R. · McGill 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 113 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “When similar but unrelated offenses are jointly charged to a single defendant, some prejudice almost necessarily results, and the same is true when several defendants are jointly charged with a single offense or related offenses. Rule 8(a) permits the first sort of prejudice and Rule 8(b) the second. But the Rules do not permit cumulation of prejudice by charging several defendants with similar but unrelated offenses.”
    10 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““Two or more defendants may be charged in the same indictment or information if they are alleged to have participated in the same act or transaction or in the same series of acts or transactions constituting an offense or offenses. Such defendants may be charged in one or more counts together or separately and all of the defendants need not be charged in each count.””
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “(a) Joinder of Offenses. Two or more offenses may be charged in the same indictment or information in a separate count for each offense if the offenses charged, whether felonies or misdemeanors or both, are of the same or similar character or are based on the same act or transaction or on two or more acts or transactions connected together or constituting parts of a common scheme or plan.”
    3 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.