United States v. White’s Empirical Analysis
589 F.2d 1283 · 1979
Citation profile
44 federal appellate · 6 district · 16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 90 later decisions — most recently November 2019 · most notably United States v. Bradley (2011), United States v. Veal (1998)
44 federal appellate · 6 district · 16 state decisions — followed in 11 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
Relies on Baxter v. Palmigiano · Garrity v. State of New Jersey · Lefkowitz v. Turley · Jones v. Nor-Tex Agencies, Inc. · United States v. District Court
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 90 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a grant of summary judgment merely because of the invocation of the fifth amendment would unduly penalize the employment of the privilege.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Once it is recognized that Keno was not compelled to testify, it becomes clear that his decision to do so was a product of trial strategy. Any “waiver” of the fifth amendment must be voluntary, but invocation of the privilege does not release defendant from any choice concerning the use of his or her testimony. The fifth amendment preserves the right to choose, and the voluntariness of the choice is always affected in some way by the exigencies of a particular situation. The voluntariness inquiry necessarily incorporates an understanding that defendant cannot be free from conflicting concerns, and in any case, defendant must weight the relative advantages of silence and explanation. In the present case, the state court did not so unduly burden the employment of silence as to make the decision to testify involuntary.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[The employee] was not forced to surrender his privilege against self-incrimination in order to prevent a judgment against him; although he may have been denied his most effective defense by remaining silent, there is no indication that invocation of the fifth amendment would have necessarily resulted in an adverse judgment.”
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.