Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 630 F.2d 804 - United States v. Bright

United States v. Bright’s Empirical Analysis

630 F.2d 804 · 1980

Citation profile

340
cited by 340 later decisions
13
states following
October 2024
most recently cited

248 federal appellate · 11 district · 32 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 340 later decisions — most recently October 2024 · most notably United States v. Phillips (1981), 91 Ill. 2d 346 - People v. Dixon (1982)

248 federal appellate · 11 district · 32 state decisions — followed in 13 states

221019801990200020102020decided

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 Glasser v. United States · Kotteakos v. United States · Stovall v. Denno · Rakas v. Illinois · Jones 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 340 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[t]he essence of conspiracy is proof of a conspiratorial agreement while aiding and abetting requires there be a "community of unlawful intent” between the aider and abettor and the principal. While a community of unlawful intent is similar to an agreement, it is not the same. Thus, a defendant may wittingly aid a criminal act and be liable as an aider and abettor, but not be liable for conspiracy, which requires knowledge of and voluntary participation in an agreement to do an illegal act.”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[o]ne of the crucial factors to be considered is the information available to the government. '[G]eneric classifications in a warrant are acceptable only when a more precise description is not possible.'”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “'To be convicted of a conspiracy to violate RICO there must be proof that the individual, by his words or actions, objectively manifested an agreement to participate, directly or indirectly, in the affairs of an enterprise, through the commission of two or more predicate crimes.'”
    4 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.