Saiz v. Eyman’s Empirical Analysis
446 F.2d 884 · 1971
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently July 2004
5 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
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. Ewell · Perry v. United States · United States v. Walton · Moser v. United States · Estrella 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The general allegation that . . . potential witnesses . . . were unavailable as a result of the delay is too vague to establish that 'there is a reasonable possibility that the jury could have reached a different result by considering the asserted evidence foreclosed by delay.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Favors v. Eyman“delay was the result of purposeful or oppressive Government conduct.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Favors v. Eyman
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.