United States v. Ramirez’s Empirical Analysis
63 F.3d 937 · 1995
Citation profile
43 federal appellate · 9 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 75 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably United States v. Ivy (1996), United States v. Miller (1996)
43 federal appellate · 9 district · 3 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1385 · 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291
Relies on United States v. Leon · Franks v. Delaware · Coolidge v. New Hampshire · Johnson v. United States · Griffith v. Kentucky
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 75 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[t]he point of the Fourth Amendment, which often is not grasped by zealous officers, is not that it denies law enforcement the support of the usual inferences which reasonable men draw from their evidence. Its protection consists in requiring that those inferences be drawn by a neutral and detached magistrate instead of being judged by the officer engaged in the often competitive enterprise of ferreting out crime.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the government without 'weigh[ing] conflicting evidence or consider[ing] the credibility of witnesses.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“must have been 'flagrant enough to influence the jury to convict on grounds other than the evidence presented.' " United States v. Ivy, 83 F.3d 1266, 1288 (10th Cir.1996) (quoting United States v. Ramirez, 63 F.3d 937, 944 (10th Cir.1995)). "In assessing whether the misconduct had such an impact, we consider the trial as a whole, including the curative acts of the district court, the extent of the misconduct, and the role of the misconduct within the case.”
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.