United States v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis
613 F.2d 573 · 1980
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently February 2016 · most notably Clancy v. Zale Corp. (1986), United States v. Campa (2006)
24 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 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 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Roberts v. Louisiana · United States v. Antone · United States v. Riley · United States v. Jones
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“1) That the evidence was newly discovered and was unknown to the defendants at the time of the trial; 2) That the evidence was material, not merely cumulative or impeaching; 3) That it would probably produce an acquittal; and 4) That failure to learn of the evidence was due to no lack of diligence on the part of defendant ].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“afford[ed] reasonable grounds to question the fairness of the trial or the integrity of the verdict,”
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.