Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 39 F.3d 858 - United States v. Robaina

United States v. Robaina’s Empirical Analysis

39 F.3d 858 · 1994

Citation profile

48
cited by 48 later decisions
1
states following
August 2023
most recently cited

39 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently August 2023 · most notably United States v. Washington (2003), United States v. Davis (1996)

39 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

2401994200020102020decided

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 · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act)

Relies on Simmons v. United States · Kastigar v. United States · United States v. Valenzuela-Bernal · Doerr v. Doerr · United States v. Lane

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

  1. “defendant's right to compulsory process does not include the right to compel a witness to waive his or her Fifth Amendment privilege against self incrimination.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “This concept arises from case law, which holds that a court possesses an inherent power to grant a witness use immunity in order to effectuate the defendant's compulsory process right to secure essential exculpatory testimony.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[w]here the offenses are similar in character and occurred over a relatively short period of time and the evidence overlaps, joinder is ordinarily appropriate,”
    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.