United States v. Evers’s Empirical Analysis
552 F.2d 1119 · 1977
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Glasser v. United States · Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory · United States v. Marion · Chevron Oil Co. v. Huson · United States v. Russell
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“cases. United States v. Gomez-Rojas, 507 F.2d 1213 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 826, 96 S.Ct. 41, 46 L.Ed.2d 42 (1975); United States v. Mosley, 496 F.2d 1012 (5th Cir. 1974); United States v. Oquendo, 490 F.2d 161 (5th Cir. 1974). While at least one federal district court has held a”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[p]rosecutorial delay, not barred by the statute of limitations, solely for the purpose of insuring the most fully developed view of the law, at the time of trial, cannot be said to be a denial of due process.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[i]f uncertain law is to be made certain within the time frame of permissible prosecution, the Government may, within its discretion, await clarification.”
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.