Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 576 F.2d 223 - United States v. James

United States v. James’s Empirical Analysis

576 F.2d 223 · 1978

Citation profile

94
cited by 94 later decisions
May 2010
most recently cited

84 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 94 later decisions — most recently May 2010 · most notably United States v. Marabelles (1984), United States v. Soulard (1984)

84 federal appellate ·

60019781980199020002010decided

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. § 844

Relies on Wolf v. People of the State of Colorado · Quercia v. United States · United States v. Bayer · United States v. Park · Johnson v. Railway Express Agency, Inc.

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 94 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(N)either party, including a criminal defendant, may insist upon any particular language.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “express his opinion upon the facts, provided he makes it clear to the jury that all matters of fact are submitted to their determination”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “I have made mention of the evidence but not in any manner for the purpose of suggesting to you whether or not I think Mr. James is guilty.... [A]ny view that I might have with respect to the guilt or innocence of Mr. James ... is altogether beside the point. Yours is the job of making that determination.”
    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.