United States v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
525 F.2d 999 · 1975
Citation profile
34 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently July 2008 · most notably United States v. Beechum (1978), United States v. McCaskill (1982)
34 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 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 · 18 U.S.C. § 3500
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Wong Sun v. United States · Harris v. New York · Brown v. United States · Gotthelf v. Commissioner
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“just as even a suppressed statement can be used on cross-examination to test the credibility of the defendant, Harris v. New York, 401 U.S. 222 , 91 S.Ct. 643, 28 L.Ed.2d 1 (1971), so may a statement improperly withheld from discovery, provided no prejudice has been shown....”
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.