United States v. Jefferson’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
1
cited by 1 later decisions
November 2009
most recently cited
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 201 (Bank Bribery Amendments)
Relies on United States v. Brewster · United States v. Birdsall · Torres v. County of Oakland · United States v. Perkins · United States v. Carson
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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“opinion testimony that states a legal standard or draws a legal conclusion by applying law to the facts is generally inadmissible.” United States v. McIver, 470 F.3d 550, 562 (4th Cir.2006); see also United States v. Jefferson, 623 F.Supp.2d 683, 686-88 (E.D.Va.2009); Fed.R.Evid. 702 (allowing expert testimony only where such testimony”
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.