Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 607 F.2d 877 - United States v. Samango

United States v. Samango’s Empirical Analysis

607 F.2d 877 · 1979

Citation profile

162
cited by 162 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
11
states following
October 2024
most recently cited

87 federal appellate · 11 district · 28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 162 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2024 · most notably United States v. Williams (1992), United States v. Sepulveda (1993)

87 federal appellate · 11 district · 28 state decisions — followed in 11 states

1220197919801990200020102020decided

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 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 848 (§ 408 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 952

Relies on United States v. Calandra · Costello v. United States · Stirone v. United States · Branzburg v. Hayes · Olmstead 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 162 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “A line must be drawn beyond which prosecutor's control over a cooperative grand jury may not extend.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[t]he cumulative effect of the above errors and indiscretions, none of which alone might have been enough to tip the scales, operated to the defendants' prejudice by producing a biased grand jury.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “'will not interfere with the Attorney General's prosecutorial discretion unless it is abused to such an extent as to be arbitrary and capricious and violative of due process.'”
    5 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.