Test v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
110 federal appellate · 13 district · 36 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 244 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2025 · most notably United States v. Studley (1986), United States v. Miller (1997)
110 federal appellate · 13 district · 36 state decisions — followed in 10 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Lefkowitz v. Newsome
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 244 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(W)ithout inspection, a party almost invariably would be unable to determine whether he has a potentially meritorious jury challenge.”
13 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The contents of records or papers used by the jury commission or clerk in connection with the jury selection process shall not be disclosed, except ... as may be necessary in the preparation or presentation of a motion [challenging compliance with selection procedures] under ... this section____ The parties in a case shall be allowed to inspect, reproduce, and copy such records or papers at all reasonable times during the preparation and pendency of such a motion.”
12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the United States and the defendant in a criminal case, and ... any party in a civil case.”
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.