Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 526 F.2d 708 - United States v. Crook

United States v. Crook’s Empirical Analysis

526 F.2d 708 · 1976

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
2
states following
August 1998
most recently cited

28 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently August 1998 · most notably United States v. Coronado (1977), State v. Ziemba (1984)

28 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions

230197619801990decided

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. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 5010 · 26 U.S.C. § 5861 (§ 201 of the Gun Control Act of 1968)

Relies on Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. of New York · McCarthy v. United States · United States v. Vera

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

  1. “it would not be harmless error if the trial judge totally abdicated to the prosecution the responsibility for giving to the defendant the various Rule 11 warnings, as this 'results in the creation of an atmosphere of subtle coercion that clearly contravenes the policy behind Rule 11.'”
    3 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.