Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 364 F.2d 210 - Gregory v. United States

Gregory v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

364 F.2d 210 · 1966

Citation profile

40
cited by 40 later decisions
1
states following
February 1996
most recently cited

38 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently February 1996 · most notably United States v. Van Poyck (1996), Sewell v. United States (1969)

38 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

2601966197019801990decided

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

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Robert Charles Maguire v. United States of America, Charles Russel Giles v. United States · Grandsinger v. United States · Garrison 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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““The fourth objection directs itself to whether a fatal variance exists because the complaint alleges August 17, 1965 as the date of the offense and the indictment alleges August 27, 1965 as the date. Rule 7(c), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, indicates that errors or omissions shall not be grounds for reversal unless the defendant has been misled to his prejudice. “Generally, a well-founded fatal variance objection is based upon a date which occurred after the indictment has been returned or so far before the date of the indictment as to clearly indicate the availability of a limitations defense in the cause. The appellant having offered no evidence in defense of the charge, it is difficult to determine how he could have been prejudiced.””
    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.