United States v. Jaswal’s Empirical Analysis
47 F.3d 539 · 1995
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 8 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 97 later decisions — most recently May 2024 · most notably United States v. Morrison (1998), United States v. Rigas (2007)
18 federal appellate · 8 district · 7 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
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 952
Relies on Simmons v. United States · United States v. Young · Moran v. Burbine · Lego v. Twomey · United States v. Dunnigan
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 97 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Generally, promises of leniency will not render a confession involuntary.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“I think you can conclude..permissible if clearly communicating nothing more than a comment on the evidence). . Other examples in the initial summation include:”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Finally, regarding appellants contentions that the statements were inadmissible due to unreasonable delay in appearing before a magistrate, this court has held that “a lapse of hours between arrest and arraignment, standing alone, does not require exclusion of a statement made during the period.” United States v. Rubio, 709 F.2d 146, 153 (2d Cir.1983). In this instance, justifiable circumstances existed which delayed the defendants’ appearance before the magistrate, and no evidence of any kind of coercion exists. Therefore, the district court’s ruling with respect to admissibility of defendants’ postarrest statements is affirmed.”
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.