Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 435 F.3d 36 - United States v. O'Brien

United States v. O'Brien’s Empirical Analysis

435 F.3d 36 · 2006

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
May 2025
most recently cited

20 federal appellate · 3 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently May 2025 · most notably United States v. Gobbi (2006), United States v. Tejeda (2007)

20 federal appellate · 3 district ·

190200620102020decided

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

Relies on United States v. Booker · United States v. Olano · Brecht v. Abrahamson · Doyle v. Ohio · United States v. Dunnigan

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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “This is not necessarily a criticism of defense counsel. No lawyer carries around in his or her head all of the endless precedents on evidence and procedure, and while it would be strange for a defense counsel not to know the Miranda rule, many lawyers have never heard of Doyle. And neither have many judges: that is why objecting counsel either had to point to Doyle or a counterpart case or had to articulate an objection that was in substance close to the rationale of Doyle. The law is nothing if not practical. Where objecting counsel offers the right objection, the judge has to get the ruling right and will otherwise be reversed unless the error is patently harmless. If the wrong objection or none at all is offered, the conviction will ordinarily be reversed if (1) an error occurred in admitting evidence; (2) the error was plain; (3) it likely altered the result; and (4) it reflects some fundamental unfairness.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the result would quite likely have been the same”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “so long as the statutory ceiling is not raised”
    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.