Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 463 F.2d 988 - United States v. LaBarbera

United States v. LaBarbera’s Empirical Analysis

463 F.2d 988 · 1972

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
5
states following
November 2008
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently November 2008

10 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

1001972198019902000decided

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. § 3500 · 18 U.S.C. § 659

Relies on Pinkerton v. United States · Alford v. United States · Smith v. Illinois · Callanan v. United States · United States v. Varelli

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. “. . The Smith court reaffirmed the earlier ruling in Alford v. United States, 282 U.S. 687 , 51 S.Ct. 218 , 75 L. Ed. 624 (1931), which initially set the perimeters of cross-examination by imposing a duty on the court to prohibit questions threatening a witness’s Fifth Amendment rights as well as questions which, '. . . go beyond the bounds of proper cross-examination merely to harass, annoy or humiliate [the witness]. . ’ Alford v. United States, at page 693, 51 S.Ct. at page 220 . A further exception to unlimited cross-examination is represented by Justice White’s concurring opinion in Smith , as to inquiries which, upon a proper showing, endanger the personal safety of a witness. . . . ””
    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.