United States v. Dawson’s Empirical Analysis
516 F.2d 796 · 1975
Citation profile
57 federal appellate · 3 district · 9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 80 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2021 · most notably Hudson v. Palmer (1984), United States v. Hearst (1977)
57 federal appellate · 3 district · 9 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. § 201 (Bank Bribery Amendments) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291
Relies on Katz v. United States · Boyd v. United States · Warden, Maryland Penitentiary v. Hayden · Stirone v. United States · Russell 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 80 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]t is obvious that a jail shares none of the attributes of privacy of a home, an automobile, an office, or a hotel room. In prison, official surveillance had traditionally been the order of the day.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“After an indictment has been returned, its charges may not be broadened through amendment — whether it be by physical alteration, jury instruction, or bill of particulars — except by the grand jury. Simply correcting an obvious clerical error or eliminating surplusage from the text of the indictment may be harmless error, but amending the indictment to charge a new crime through the jury instructions constitutes per se reversible error.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“'. . . a portion of an indictment that the evidence does not support may be withdrawn from the jury, and this is not an impermissible amendment, provided nothing is thereby added to the indictment, and that the remaining allegations charge an offense.' (C. Wright, 1 Federal Practice and Procedure 274-75 (1969).)”
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.