United States v. Beverly’s Empirical Analysis
5 F.3d 633 · 1993
Citation profile
52 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 106 later decisions — most recently May 2018 · most notably United States v. Diaz (1999), United States v. Thai (1994)
52 federal appellate · 3 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. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 861 (§ 420 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on United States v. Olano · Delaware v. Van Arsdall · Zafiro v. United States · Michigan v. Jackson · United States v. Havens
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 106 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[w]here a defendant testifies on direct about a specific fact, the prosecution is entitled to prove on cross-examination that he lied as to that fact,”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“judges are accorded 'wide latitude' in excluding evidence ... that is 'repetitive or only marginally relevant' " (quoting Delaware v. Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. 673 , 679 (1986)); see also United States v. Beverly, 5 F.3d 633 , 641 (2d Cir.1993) ("To demonstrate an abuse of ... discretion, a defendant must demonstrate arbitrary action that substantially impaired the defense.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Facts in support of a sentencing calculation need only be proven by a preponderance of the evidence, and the district court's findings will not be disturbed unless clearly erroneous.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.