Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 417 F.2d 11 - United States v. Eagleston

United States v. Eagleston’s Empirical Analysis

417 F.2d 11 · 1969

Citation profile

95
cited by 95 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
4
states following
March 2001
most recently cited

79 federal appellate · 4 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 95 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2001 · most notably United States v. Lane (1986), United States v. Somers (1974)

79 federal appellate · 4 district · 5 state decisions

76019691970198019902000decided

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. § 2312 · 18 U.S.C. § 2314

Relies on Chimel v. California · Lambert v. People of the State of California · Illinois Power Co. v. Local Union No. 51, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers · Evans v. United States · Gilbert 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 95 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “"Joinder of Defendants. Two or moré defendants may be charged in the same indictment or information if they are alleged to have participated in the same act or transaction or in the same series of acts or transactions constituting an offense or offenses.””
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Joinder of Offenses. Two or more offenses may be charged in the same indictment or information in a separate count for each offense if the offenses charged ... are of the same or similar character or are based on the same act or transaction or on two or more acts or transactions connected together or constituting parts of a common scheme or plan.”
    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.