Camp v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
413 F.2d 419 · 1969
Citation profile
61 federal appellate · 6 district · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 93 later decisions — most recently January 1996 · most notably United States v. James (1976), United States v. John E. Test, Francis R. Salazar v. United States of America, United States of America v. Enrique Sandoval Chavez, United States of America v. Cameron David Bishop (1976)
61 federal appellate · 6 district · 10 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 28 U.S.C. § 1866 · 50 U.S.C. § 3806 · 50 U.S.C. § 3811
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · McKart v. United States · O’Callahan v. Parker, Warden · Giordano v. United States · Stoner v. California
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 93 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Plans, if approved, may require supplemental sources if needed to assure a fair cross-section of the community. But the principal, if not sole, source is to be voter registration lists for random selection. Use of such lists as the sole source of names for jury duty is constitutionally permissible unless this system results in the.systematic exclusion of a ‘cognizable group or class of qualified citizens.’”
4 later decisions 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.