United States v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
515 F.2d 730 · 1975
Citation profile
40 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently September 2010 · most notably United States v. Patrick (1976), United States v. Wright (1991)
40 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 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. § 2313 · 18 U.S.C. § 371
Relies on Kotteakos v. United States · Berger v. United States · Pinkerton v. United States · United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co. · Blumenthal v. United States
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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]here, at the close of testimony, it is clear, as here, that a jury could not find a single overall conspiracy as a matter of law, the defendant is not only entitled to a multiple conspiracies instruction but also to an instruction that evidence relating to the other conspiracy or conspiracies disclosed may not be used against him under any circumstances.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[I]f one cannot say, with fair assurance, after pondering all that happened without stripping the erroneous action from • the whole, that the judgment was not substantially swayed by the error, it is impossible to conclude that substantial rights were not affected. The inquiry cannot be merely whether there was enough to support the result, apart from the phase affected by the error. It is rather, even so, whether the error itself had substantial influence. If so, or if one is left in grave doubt, the conviction cannot stand.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“When the proof at trial reveals the existence of more than one conspiracy, 'the adequacy of the trial judge's instructions are of critical importance in evaluating the likelihood [that] confusion or prejudice' resulted from transference of guilt from one conspiracy to another.”
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.