United States v. Baldwin’s Empirical Analysis
607 F.2d 1295 · 1979
Citation profile
92 federal appellate · 2 district · 13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 126 later decisions — most recently February 2017 · most notably United States v. Baker (1993), United States v. Feldman (1986)
92 federal appellate · 2 district · 13 state decisions — followed in 10 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. § 641 (Livestock Fraud Protection Act)
Relies on Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory · Thompson v. United States · Stoner v. California · Perez v. United States · United States v. Dellinger
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 126 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“All circuits appear to be in agreement that the refusal to ask the question of whether the prospective jurors would be unduly influenced by the testimony of a law enforcement officer does not always constitute reversible error; that question hinges upon such factors as the importance of the government agent’s testimony to the case as a whole; the extent to which the question concerning the venireperson’s attitude toward government agents is covered in other questions on voir dire and on the charge to the jury; the extent to which the credibility of the government agent-witness is put into issue; and the extent to which the testimony of the government agent is corroborated by non-agent witnesses.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Discretion is not properly exercised if the questions are not reasonably sufficient to test the jury for bias or partiality.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he trial judge should keep uppermost in his mind the fact that the parties have the right to some surface information about prospective jurors which might furnish the basis for an informed exercise of peremptory challenges or motions to strike for cause based upon a lack of impartiality.”
6 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.