United States v. Brooks’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 10 U.S.C. § 867 · 10 U.S.C. § 872 · 10 U.S.C. § 873 · 10 U.S.C. § 881 · 10 U.S.C. § 912A
Relies on Sanders v. United States · Power Reactor Development Co. v. International Union of Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers · United States v. Metz · United States v. Gale Nace and Nathan J. Warren, Sr., United States of America v. Ned Warren, Sr., and Gale Nace · United States v. Montilla-Rivera
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(A) The evidence was discovered after the trial; (B) The evidence is not such that it would have been discovered by the petitioner at the time of trial in the exercise of due diligence; and (C) The newly discovered evidence, if considered by a court-martial in the light of all other pertinent evidence, would probably produce a substantially more favorable result for the accused.”
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.