United States v. Patterson’s Empirical Analysis
41 F.3d 577 · 1994
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 7 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently October 2019
7 federal appellate · 7 district · 1 state decisions
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. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act)
Relies on Foster v. North Texas Production Credit Ass'n · United States v. Natanel · United States v. Seago · United States v. Maestas · United States v. Lopez
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the absence of [the witness] could have been prejudicial to defendant because the jury had been told, and was anticipating the testimony of [the witness], and the fact that he did not testify could have created an inference that his testimony would not have been favorable to the defense.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“'The [trial] court on motion of a defendant may grant a new trial to the defendant if required in the interest of justice.'”
1 later decision 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.