Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 441 F.2d 736 - Turner v. United States

Turner v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

441 F.2d 736 · 1971

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
2
states following
May 1990
most recently cited

15 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently May 1990

15 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

130197119801990decided

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. § 3432

Relies on Glasser v. United States · United States v. Rosenberg · Panci v. United States · Grant v. United States · United States v. Ragsdale

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

  1. “Appellant admits that it is within a proper exercise of the trial court’s discretion to permit a reopening of either the government’s case or that of the defendant after the other side has rested and relies mainly upon Dixon v. United States (5th Cir. 1964), 333 F. 2d 348 , and upon 23 C.J.S. Criminal Law § 1053, page 1229, to the effect that “where new matter has been introduced by the state in rebuttal of an alibi defense the defendant may rebut the same on surrebuttal”. The testimony of the government’s rebuttal testimony in this case does not appear to us to be “new”. The government had maintained throughout that the Defendant Turner was in Miami during the commission of the offense and the testimony of the two rebuttal witnesses simply goes to corroboration of that fact. In the event defendant had been allowed to take the stand at the surrebuttal he would only have been able to reiterate what he and others had testified to previously and that was to the effect that he had not been in Miami since June 5,1966.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “It appears well settled that the reopening of a case to receive additional evidence is within the Trial Court's discretion.”
    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.