United States v. King’s Empirical Analysis
628 F.3d 693 · 2011
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3500 · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Olano · United States v. Agurs · Kyles v. Whitley · Grupo Mexicano Desarrollos v. Alliance Bond Fund Inc
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In reviewing the district court's denial of [a] Brady motion, we review its legal conclusions de novo and its factual findings for clear error.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a defendant need only make 'some plausible showing' that exculpatory material exists.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“identify the requested confidential material with some degree of specificity.”
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.