United States v. Kurzer’s Empirical Analysis
534 F.2d 511 · 1976
Citation profile
69 federal appellate · 1 district · 13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 114 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2017 · most notably United States v. Apfelbaum (1980), United States v. Turkish (1980)
69 federal appellate · 1 district · 13 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. § 1952 · 18 U.S.C. § 6002 · 18 U.S.C. § 6003 · 26 U.S.C. § 7206
Relies on Wong Sun v. United States · Kastigar v. United States · Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States · Murphy v. Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor · Patterson 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 114 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he Fifth Amendment, in contrast, is by its terms an exclusionary rule”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““We do not hold that should Steinman testify, as the Government has indicated he will, that the March 1973 indictments were irrelevant to his decision to cooperate, this would end the matter. The district court must determine Steinman’s credibility, not only in terms of his inclination to tell the truth, but also with regard to whether he is truly able to isolate the factors which convinced him to cooperate. Human motivation is often difficult to discern, and a decision is frequently the product of several concurrent influences.” At 517.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he ordinary remedy for the Government when an immunized witness lies or fails to cooperate fully is a prosecution for perjury or for contempt, rather than abrogation of the immunity agreement and use of the information truthfully given by the immunized witness to prosecute him for other offenses.”
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.