United States v. Marks’s Empirical Analysis
585 F.2d 164 · 1978
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently October 2004
15 federal appellate · 1 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1465 · 18 U.S.C. § 371
Relies on Bruton v. United States · Roth v. United States · Harrington v. California · Miller v. California · Marks 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The government argues that the purposes of cross-examination were served here by the defense attorneys’ ability to question Mr. DeFalaise, who read the transcript and had done most of the interrogation before the grand jury. Clearly it was Weir’s credibility, not De-Falaise’s, which was in issue. Cross-examination of DeFalaise could not substitute for confronting Weir.”
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.