Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 527 F.2d 16 - United States v. Roundtree

United States v. Roundtree’s Empirical Analysis

527 F.2d 16 · 1975

Citation profile

40
cited by 40 later decisions
5
states following
December 2008
most recently cited

30 federal appellate · 8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently December 2008 · most notably State v. Fullwood (1984), United States v. Dodge (1976)

30 federal appellate · 8 state decisions

2001975198019902000decided

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. § 111 (Federal Judiciary Protection Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 2112 · 18 U.S.C. § 2113 · 18 U.S.C. § 641 (Livestock Fraud Protection Act)

Relies on Blockburger v. United States · United States v. Feola · Gore v. United States · Prince v. United States · Alfred Dunhill of London, Inc. v. Republic of Cuba

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

  1. “is a comprehensive statute containing special provisions for increased punishment for aggravated offenses. It is intended to cover most of the aggressions that may arise from a bank robbery and provides additional penalties within a single conviction for aggravated offenses.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “forcibly assaults, resists, opposes, impedes, intimidates, or interferes with”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “proof of facts that the other does not. 18 U.S.C. § 111 is designed to protect federal law enforcement officers while performing federal functions . . . and requires proof of those facts to sustain a conviction. 18 U.S.C. § 2112 is designed to protect those who have government property in their immediate possession and requires proof that the property taken belongs to the United States”
    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.