United States v. Cortwright’s Empirical Analysis
528 F.2d 168 · 1975
Citation profile
38 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 45 later decisions — most recently August 2011 · most notably United States v. Harris (1976), Elmore v. State (1978)
38 federal appellate · 2 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. § 2 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Berger v. United States · Pereira v. United States · Krulewitch v. United States · United States v. Kissel · United States v. Varelli
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 45 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The defendants further claim that they were denied a fair trial because one of the defendants, who sat at counsel table and was ‘privy to confidential matters discussed between other defendants and defense counsel’ and had the ‘opportunity to observe and hear the testimony of other government witnesses,’ pleaded guilty and was allowed to testify for the government in violation of the court’s order separation of witnesses. Clearly, the court’s order separating witnesses can only apply to those who are known to be witnesses at the time. After Moore, the defendant-witness here in question, pleaded guilty, he was no longer allowed in the courtroom. * * * The defendants were not denied a fair trial because of Moore’s testimony.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[d]ouble jeopardy is not violated by a trial on a substantive count and a conspiracy count.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The sufficiency of the evidence in a conspiracy prosecution requires close scrutiny.”
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.