United States v. Haskell’s Empirical Analysis
468 F.3d 1064 · 2006
Citation profile
30 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently August 2023 · most notably United States v. Kozeny (2011), United States v. Sigillito (2014)
30 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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 Batson v. Kentucky · Delaware v. Van Arsdall · Davis v. Alaska · Chambers v. Mississippi · Miller-El v. Dretke
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A successful Rule 33(b) movant must show that: (1) the evidence [was] unknown or unavailable to the defendant at the time of trial; (2) the defendant [was] duly diligent in attempting to uncover it; (3) the newly discovered evidence [is] material; and (4)the newly discovered evidence ... probably will result in an acquittal upon retrial.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“reverse only if there was misjoinder which had a substantial and injurious effect or influence on the verdict.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“to gain a tactical advantage or to harass him.”
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.