United States v. Jordan’s Empirical Analysis
2022
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Molina-Martinez v. United States · Rosales-Mireles v. United States · United States v. Drougas · United States v. Perez-Ruiz · United States v. Soto-Beníquez
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) . . . an error occurred (2) which was clear or obvious and which not only (3) affected the defendant's substantial rights, - 13 - but also (4) seriously impaired the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“poisoned the well that the trial's outcome was likely affected.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) the severity of the prosecutor's misconduct, including whether it was deliberate or accidental; (2) the context in which the misconduct occurred; (3) whether the judge gave curative instructions and the likely effect of such instructions; and (4) the strength of the evidence against the defendant[].”
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.