Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 525 F.2d 710 - United States v. Griffin

United States v. Griffin’s Empirical Analysis

525 F.2d 710 · 1975

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
1
states following
July 2016
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently July 2016

11 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions

9019751980199020002010decided

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

Relies on United States v. Feola · Pettibone v. United States · Parham v. Cortese · United States v. Truesdell · United States v. Langone

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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Defendant did not take the stand, and there was no direct evidence as to his actual knowledge. The government offered a quantity of newspaper and television files intended to show wide publicity, but the court excluded them. It is not altogether clear why it did. Possibly it was because the files were not separated so as to distinguish between reports of the court order and general accounts of busing. The government offered no other evidence, such as testimony of notoriety or general knowledge of the order in the neighborhood. The evidence of the crowd’s conduct cannot support the jury verdict since there is nothing indicating that the members of the crowd realized that the busing it protested emanated from a federal court order as distinguished from some other source of authority. We agree with the district court that it would not be necessary to show knowledge of the specific terms of the order, and we might have no problem if the government had introduced evidence of broad neighborhood knowledge or publicity, but absent evidence from which to infer awareness of the order by the defendant, we must find that the government did not make out its case.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “absent evidence from which to infer awareness of the order by the defendant, we must find that the government did not make out its case.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.