United States v. Bolts’s Empirical Analysis
558 F.2d 316 · 1977
Citation profile
115 federal appellate · 1 district · 21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 158 later decisions — most recently July 2023 · most notably United States v. Phillips (1981), United States v. Barnes (1979)
115 federal appellate · 1 district · 21 state decisions — followed in 13 states
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. § 843 (§ 403 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 848 (§ 408 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 952
Relies on Coolidge v. New Hampshire · Sedillo v. United States · Starnes v. Penrod Drilling Co. · Bullock v. United States · White 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 158 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(A) which are undertaken by such person in concert with five or more other persons with respect to whom such person occupies a position of organizer, a supervisory position, or any other position of management, and”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“If it appears that a defendant or the government is prejudiced by a joinder of offenses or of defendants in an indictment or information or by such joinder for trial together, the court may order an election or separate trials of counts, grant a severance of defendants or provide whatever other relief justice requires.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Gipson involved a situation where the court expressly sanctioned a non-unanimous verdict; the jurors were told that they could disagree as to what particular acts were committed, as long as each juror found that one of the acts had been done. [Emphasis added].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Utter
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.