United States v. Matlock’s Empirical Analysis
558 F.2d 1328 · 1977
Citation profile
45 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002)
Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Chimel v. California · Chambers v. Maroney · Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory · United States v. Marion
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Investigative delay is fundamentally unlike delay undertaken by the government to gain tactical advantage over the defendant, and due process does not require a dismissal for pre-indictment investigative delay.”
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.