United States v. Long’s Empirical Analysis
419 F.2d 91 · 1969
Citation profile
26 federal appellate · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently December 2010 · most notably United States v. Gallo (1985), Wilbert Herring v. W. J. Estelle, Director, Texas Department of Corrections (1974)
26 federal appellate · 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 18 U.S.C. § 473 · 28 U.S.C. § 753
Relies on Glasser v. United States · Murphy v. Houma Well Service · Huth v. Southern Pacific Co. · Associated Press v. Taft-Ingalls Corp. · Odom 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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ . . . While full and explicit compliance with the Act [Court Reporter’s Act] would eliminate many problems arising subsequent to trial and its nonobservance has been repeatedly discouraged, the rule in this Circuit is established that the failure to record such proceedings is not per se reversible error. Strauss v. United States, 311 F.2d 926 (5th Cir. 1963); Addison v. United States, 317 F.2d 808 (5th Cir. 1963). In Strauss and Addison the Court clearly stated that to require reversal, some specific error or prejudice resulting from failure to record such proceedings must be called to the court’s attention. In the present case no such specific objections or allegations were made before the trial court or this court. This fact alone destroys appellant’s position, Addison v. United States, supra at 8i1, and distinguishes the present case from those in which this court has reversed convictions for failure to record proceedings.” [Emphasis added.]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In light of the uncomplicated nature of the present case, appellant’s full access to the government’s complete file, including names of all government witnesses and their full statements, we cannot find an abuse of discretion in denying a continuance.”
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.