Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 446 F.2d 623 - Goff v. United States

Goff v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

446 F.2d 623 · 1971

Citation profile

65
cited by 65 later decisions
13
states following
January 2019
most recently cited

42 federal appellate · 18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 65 later decisions — most recently January 2019 · most notably State v. Maupin (1975), United States v. Bailey (1972)

42 federal appellate · 18 state decisions — followed in 13 states

40019711980199020002010decided

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

Relies on North Carolina v. Pearce · Ashe v. Swenson · Ball v. United States · Royal Netherlands Steamship Co. v. Strachan Shipping Co. · Tocco 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 65 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “place[d] a time fuse on the period of jury deliberation”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““This court has approved the ‘Allen’ type instruction under circumstances of an apparent deadlocked jury, providing that the court carefully avoid any indicia of partiality or coercion. Burroughs v. United States, 365 F.2d 431 (10th Cir.1966); Elbel v. United States, 364 F.2d 127 (10th Cir.1966), cert. denied 385 U. S. 1014 , 87 S.Ct. 726 , 17 L.Ed.2d 550 (1967). An instruction to the jurors that they should deliberate together in an atmosphere of mutual respect and understanding, carefully avoiding any indication that they should forfeit conscientiously held convictions, whether by original or supplemental instruction, is a matter properly within the discretion of the trial judge. . . . ””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““In deciding a motion for acquittal the trial judge determines whether, considering the evidence in the light most favorable to the government, there is substantial evidence from which a jury might reasonably find that an accused is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.””
    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.