United States v. Fulcher’s Empirical Analysis
626 F.2d 985 · 1980
Citation profile
26 federal appellate · 4 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently August 2016 · most notably United States v. Winter (1981), United States v. Ianniello (1986)
26 federal appellate · 4 district · 5 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
Relies on Dunn v. United States · Rogers v. United States · Lakeside v. Oregon · Shields v. United States · Walker 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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Each count must stand on its own, and cannot depend for its validity on the allegations of any other count not specifically incorporated.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Count One, however, does not incorporate by reference either Count Five or Count Thirty-Two and neither of them refers to Count One. Only Count Two, which does not name the DeMetris as defendants, incorporates Count One by reference. The indictment as drawn does not admit of Counts Five and Thirty-Two being used as predicate acts for Count One. “Each count in an indictment is regarded as if it was a separate indictment.” ... “Each count must stand on its own, and cannot depend for its validity on allegations in another count not specifically incorporated.” ... We find Count One legally insufficient as to Charles and James DeMetri because it fails to charge that they agreed to commit two predicate crimes. It must, therefore, be dismissed as to them, and their convictions on it reversed.”
2 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.