United States v. King’s Empirical Analysis
563 F.2d 559 · 1977
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently January 1996
14 federal appellate · 6 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
Relies on Ashe v. Swenson · Bates v. State Bar · Wingo v. Wedding · Parham v. Cortese · United States v. Berrios
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"In United States v. Cala , 521 F.2d 605 , 608 (2d Cir. 1975), we held that the defendant has the burden of establishing that the issue which he seeks to foreclose from consideration was `necessarily' determined in his favor in a prior prosecution. When the prior proceeding was a jury trial, the burden is a heavy one, since `it usually cannot be determined with any certainty upon what basis the previous jury reached its general verdict', United States v. Gugliario , 501 F.2d 68 , 70 (2d Cir. 1974); United States v. Seijo , 537 F.2d 694 , 697 (2d Cir. 1976), cert. denied , 429 U.S. 1043 , 97 S.Ct. 745 , 50 L.Ed.2d 756 (1977)." King , 563 F.2d at 561 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“plausible explanation[ ] for the jury's failure to convict,”
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.