United States v. Spinks’s Empirical Analysis
470 F.2d 64 · 1972
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 1 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 1991 · most notably Parker v. Randolph (1979), Cruz v. New York (1987)
17 federal appellate · 1 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 18 U.S.C. § 2113
Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Bruton v. United States · Harrington v. California · Schneble v. Florida · United States v. S. Lawrence Kahn, Arthur B. Sachs and M. Prial Curran
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In the case before us, ... both Spinks and Turner gave substantially similar confessions. We think that ‘where the jury has heard not only a codefendant’s confession but the defendant’s own confession, no such “devastating” risk attends the lack of confrontation as was thought to be involved in Bruton.’ (citations omitted). “There is no merit in Spinks’ claim that he was prejudiced by denial of the right to cross-examine Turner. It would be ludicrous to have Spinks trying to break down Turner’s confession which implicated Spinks, while Spinks’ own confession remained unchallenged. And even if Turner’s confession had been excluded from evidence — or even if Spinks’ motion for severance had been granted — Spinks would still be faced with his own confession.” ( 470 F.2d at 66 ).”
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.