Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 508 F.2d 1226 - United States v. Dye

United States v. Dye’s Empirical Analysis

508 F.2d 1226 · 1974

Citation profile

106
cited by 106 later decisions
4
states following
September 2011
most recently cited

80 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 106 later decisions — most recently September 2011 · most notably United States v. Gallo (1985), United States v. Stone (1984)

80 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 state decisions

39019741980199020002010decided

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. § 3500

Relies on Glasser v. United States · Bruton v. United States · Simmons v. United States · Jones v. United States · Jackson v. Denno

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.

  1. “a finding of guilt may be based on circumstantial evidence which does not remove every reasonable hypothesis except that of guilt.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the general rule in conspiracy cases is that persons jointly indicted should be tried together and that this is particularly true where the offenses charged may be established against all of the defendants by the same evidence and which result from the same series of acts.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[a] jury conviction must be sustained if there is substantial evidence on the record to support it. In making this determination, an appellate court must view all the evidence in the light most favorable to the government, resolve all inferences which may reasonably be drawn from the evidence in the government's favor and resolve all conflicts in the testimony in the same way. If, under such a review, there is sufficient competent evidence on the record to justify a rational juror's conclusion that every element of the offense has been established beyond a reasonable doubt, the conviction must be affirmed.”
    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.