United States v. Damra’s Empirical Analysis
621 F.3d 474 · 2010
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
Appellate journey
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1425 · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 26 U.S.C. § 6531 · 26 U.S.C. § 7201 · 26 U.S.C. § 7206 · 28 U.S.C. § 1827 · 8 U.S.C. § 1451 (§ 340 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Gall v. United States · Crawford v. Washington · Bruton v. United States · Rita v. United States · Puckett 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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the nature of the evidence is exceptionally complex or the alternative specifications are contradictory or only marginally related to each other; or (2) there is a variance between indictment and proof at trial; or (3) there is tangible indication of jury confusion, as when the jury has asked questions or the court has given regular or supplementary instructions that create a significant risk of nonunanimity.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“An act or failure to act is willful. For purposes of tax evasion ... it is voluntary, intentional violation of a known legal duty rather than the result of an accident, mistake or negligence. (Emphasis added.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. United States v. Rae
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.