Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 625 F.2d 775 - United States v. Metz

United States v. Metz’s Empirical Analysis

625 F.2d 775 · 1980

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
January 2010
most recently cited

4 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Relies on Griffin v. California · Erickson v. United States · Lakeside v. Oregon · Dombrowski v. Pfister · De Luna 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[A]n examination of the statements made by Spero’s counsel reveals no direct reference to Metz’s decision not to testify. Instead, the remarks were limited to the decision made by Metz’s co-defendants to take the stand and subject themselves to cross-examination. Under the circumstances, any prejudice which Metz might have suffered is the product of inference, alone, and can in no way be compared to the direct statements of the codefendant’s counsel in De Luna.”
    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.