United States v. Gentile’s Empirical Analysis
495 F.2d 626 · 1974
Citation profile
59 federal appellate · 1 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 78 later decisions — most recently February 2015 · most notably United States v. Kopituk (1982), United States v. Harrelson (1985)
59 federal appellate · 1 district · 5 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
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · Schaffer v. United States · California v. Curry · Gordon v. United States · United States v. Jacquillon
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 78 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“on the relatedness of the facts underlying each offense .... [W]hen the facts underlying each offense are so closely connected that proof of such facts is necessary to establish each offense, joinder of defendants and offenses is proper.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Two or more defendants may be charged in the same indictment or information if they are alleged to have participated in the same act or transaction or in the same series of acts or transactions constituting an offense or offenses. Such defendants may be charged in one or more counts together or separately and all of the defendants need not be charged in each count.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(w)hile the government is not required to actually produce the informer at trial, once the identity is revealed, we think the better practice is to require disclosure of the last known residence of the informer or to provide reasonable assistance in locating him.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Sigard v. State
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.