United States v. Ziperstein’s Empirical Analysis
601 F.2d 281 · 1979
Citation profile
85 federal appellate · 1 district · 24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 133 later decisions — most recently December 2016 · most notably United States v. Briscoe (1990), United States v. Lewis (1985)
85 federal appellate · 1 district · 24 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002)
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · Glasser v. United States · United States v. Matlock · Lutwak v. United States · Marshall v. Barlow's, 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 133 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a]s long as ultimate disclosure is made before it is too late for the defendants to make use of any benefits of evidence, Due Process is satisfied.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“depends on a careful evaluation of the facts elicited, prejudicial tendencies, and the entire course of the trial prior to the challenged conduct,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'mutually antagonistic' "--that is, only if "the acceptance of one party's defense will preclude the acquittal of the other.”
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.