Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 378 F.2d 245 - Decker v. United States

Decker v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

378 F.2d 245 · 1967

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
4
states following
June 2011
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2011

10 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

90196719701980199020002010decided

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 26 U.S.C. § 5851 (§ 201 of the Gun Control Act of 1968) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 29 U.S.C. § 501

Relies on Blockburger v. United States · Sanders v. United States · United States v. Universal C. I. T. Credit Corp. · Southern Railway Co. v. Jackson · Mastro Plastics Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board

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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[T]he fact that the alleged statement was known to petitioner and his counsel during the trial compelled petitioner to raise this issue then or not at all. When a criminal defendant, during his trial, has reason to believe that perjured testimony was employed by the prosecution, he must impeach the testimony at the trial, and “cannot have it both ways. He cannot withhold the evidence, gambling on an acquittal without it, and then later, after the gamble fails, present such withheld evidence in a subsequent proceeding.””
    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.