United States v. Iannelli’s Empirical Analysis
477 F.2d 999 · 1973
Citation profile
56 federal appellate · 4 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 97 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2010 · most notably Iannelli v. United States (1975), United States v. Feola (1975)
56 federal appellate · 4 district · 8 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. § 1342 · 18 U.S.C. § 1955 · 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 2510 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2516 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2517 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2518 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2520 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986)
Relies on Glasser v. United States · Kotteakos v. United States · Blumenthal v. United States · United States v. District Court · Hugh J. Addonizio 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 97 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“. The sufficiency of these reports was a matter for the supervising judge, and the breadth of his discretion must be viewed in light of the fact that he could under 18 U.S.C. 2518(6) have dispensed with progress reports entirely. See United States v. La Gorga, 336 F.Supp. 190, 194 (W.D.Pa.1971). We find no error.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In any event the suppression remedy specified in 18 U.S.C. § 2518 (10) applies to unlawful interceptions. A civil remedy applies to unlawful disclosures. 18 U.S.C. § 2250 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“... But his attorney opened the door to the testimony in question on cross-examination of the agent and did not, on re-direct, object when the question was asked....”
2 later decisions 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.