United States v. Barth’s Empirical Analysis
424 F.3d 752 · 2005
Citation profile
21 federal appellate · 4 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently November 2021 · most notably United States v. Kent (2008), United States v. Slagg (2011)
21 federal appellate · 4 district ·
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. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on United States v. Booker · Apprendi v. New Jersey · United States v. Olano · Blakely v. Washington · Kotteakos 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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the defendant could not reasonably have anticipated from the indictment the evidence to be presented against him; (2) the indictment is so vague that there is a possibility of subsequent prosecution for the same offense; or (3) the defendant was prejudiced by a ‘spillover’ of evidence from one conspiracy to another.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“affecting substantial rights if the error 'seriously affect[s] the fairness, integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings.’”
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.