United States v. Peskin’s Empirical Analysis
527 F.2d 71 · 1975
Citation profile
101 federal appellate · 3 district · 11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 141 later decisions — most recently October 2010 · most notably 117 Ill. 2d 317 - People v. Shum (1987), United States v. McPartlin (1979)
101 federal appellate · 3 district · 11 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
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Oyler v. Boles · O’Callahan v. Parker, Warden · Ohio v. Kentucky · Rewis 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 141 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Assuming that the decision to indict . . . was based in part on consideration of [the defendant’s] political prominence, this is not an impermissible basis for selection. It makes good sense to prosecute those who will receive the media’s attention. Publication of the proceedings may enhance the deterrent effect of the prosecution and maintain public faith in the precept that public officials are not above the law.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“proof that the decision to prosecute was based on impermissible considerations such as race, religion, or the desire to penalize the exercise of constitutional rights.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“. . . is probably evidence that interpretation of the remarks as coercive would be a strained rather than a natural interpretation.”
2 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.