Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 395 F.2d 976 - Bursten v. United States

Bursten v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

395 F.2d 976 · 1968

Citation profile

155
cited by 155 later decisions
7
states following
October 2023
most recently cited

126 federal appellate · 1 district · 15 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 155 later decisions — most recently October 2023 · most notably State v. Wade (1978), United States v. Conforte (1980)

126 federal appellate · 1 district · 15 state decisions

8601968197019801990200020102020decided

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. § 267 · 26 U.S.C. § 7201

Relies on United States v. Habig · Perez v. United States · Johnson v. United States · Strauss 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 155 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “'It is well known, as a matter of judicial notice, that juries are highly sensitive to every utterance by the trial judge, * * * and that some comments may be so highly prejudicial that even a strong admonition by the judge to the jury * * * will not cure the error.'”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “• “If [defense counsel] doesn’t prove it, I hope the jury will hold it against him, because he shouldn’t make that statement unless he has some proof.” • “[Defense counsel], now get back to your own case, if you have a case.” • “[Defense counsel], sit down and let the other attorney take over if you don’t know how to .cross examine this man.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “If you find that the defendant had discussed this matter with competent tax counsel and that the tax return herein was prepared pursuant to that advice, then you must find that the defendant did not willfully file a false return or make a false statement, and you should bring in a verdict of not guilty.”
    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.