Posey v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
416 F.2d 545 · 1969
Citation profile
152 federal appellate · 2 district · 22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 198 later decisions — most recently May 2015 · most notably United States v. Addonizio (1971), Gordon v. United States (1971)
152 federal appellate · 2 district · 22 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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. § 241 (Church Arson Prevention Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 3500
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Glasser v. United States · Bruton v. United States · Johnson v. State of New Jersey · Harrington 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 198 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"This court, as well as others, has held that there is no error in the admission of a co-defendant's confession, if all references to the other defendants are deleted and there is no `substantial threat' to the right of confrontation and cross-examination. Menendez v. United States, 393 F.2d 312 (5 Cir. 1968); Barton v. United States, 263 F.2d 894 (5 Cir. 1959); Calloway v. United States, 130 U.S.App.D.C. 273 , 399 F.2d 1006 (1968); Oliver v. United States, 118 U.S.App.D.C. 302 , 335 F.2d 724 (1964); Kramer v. United States, 115 U.S.App.D.C. 50 , 317 F.2d 114 (1963).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Evans v. State · Griffin v. State““The right to have the jury polled is established by Rule 31(d), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The object of a jury poll is ‘to give each juror an opportunity, before the verdict is recorded, to declare, in open court, his assent to the verdict which the foreman has returned and thus to enable the court and parties to ascertain with certainty that a unanimous verdict has in fact been reached and that no juror has been coerced or induced to agree to a verdict to which he has not fully assented.’ ” Humphries v. District of Columbia, 174 U.S. 190 , 19 S.Ct. 637 , 43 L.Ed. 944 (1899).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“it makes clear to the jury that each member has a duty conscientiously to adhere to his own honest opinion and it avoids creating the impression that there is anything improper, questionable, or contrary to good conscience for a juror to create a mistrial.”
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.