United States v. Roach’s Empirical Analysis
502 F.3d 425 · 2007
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1512 · 18 U.S.C. § 241 (Church Arson Prevention Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 242 · 18 U.S.C. § 3
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Washington v. Texas · Allen v. United States · Blackledge v. Perry · United States v. Goodwin
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[c]ourts universally condemn the injection of religion into legal proceedings.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“We evaluate claims of prosecutorial misconduct using a two-step inquiry. “First, the court must determine if the government’s statements were improper.” United States v. Abboud, 438 F.3d 554, 584 (6th Cir.2006). If we determine that the statements were in fact improper, then we “must decide whether the statements were flagrant.” Id. The “flagrancy inquiry” involves four factors: (1) whether the remarks tended to mislead the jury or to prejudice the accused [including whether the trial judge gave an appropriate cautionary instruction to the jury]; (2) whether they were isolated or extensive; (3) whether they were deliberately or accidentally placed before the jury; and (4) the strength of the evidence against the accused. Id. (citation omitted).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“To show “actual vindictiveness,” a defendant must show “objective evidence that a prosecutor acted in order to punish the defendant for standing on his legal rights,” [ ] or present sufficient evidence to create a “presumption of vindictiveness” by examining the “realistic likelihood of vindictiveness” and focusing “on the prosecutor’s ‘stake’ in deterring the exercise of a protected right and the unreasonableness of his actions.””
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.