United States v. Trapnell’s Empirical Analysis
638 F.2d 1016 · 1980
Citation profile
53 federal appellate · 3 district · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 82 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2014 · most notably McDowell v. United States (1988), United States v. Moya-Gomez (1988)
53 federal appellate · 3 district · 12 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 3432 · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 28 U.S.C. § 1654
Relies on Glasser v. United States · Faretta v. California · Douglas v. Alabama · Frazier v. Cupp · United States v. Bailey
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 82 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“ascertain if any jurors who had been exposed to such publicity had read or heard the same.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[I]f no juror indicates, upon inquiry made to the jury collectively, that he had read or heard any of the publicity in question, the judge is not required to proceed further.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“not to read or listen to accounts of the trial * * * [were not] sufficient to protect [the] jury from prejudicial trial publicity”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Bey
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.