United States v. Taylor’s Empirical Analysis
508 F.2d 761 · 1975
Citation profile
35 federal appellate · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently July 2019 · most notably Klauenberg v. State (1999), United States v. Bosch (1978)
35 federal appellate · 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2113
Relies on Bruton v. United States · Harrington v. California · Walder v. United States · Gotthelf v. Commissioner · United States v. District Court
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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Sometimes called the doctrine of invited error, the accepted rule is that where the injection of allegedly inadmissible evidence is attributable directly *Page 500 to the action of the defense, its introduction does not constitute reversible error.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“waiver of the Sixth Amendment right to confrontation, a purposeful rather than inadvertent inquiry into the forbidden matter must be shown.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“had no way to know that asking about the sawed-off rifle would lead the witness into the [challenged] statement”
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.