United States v. Cederquist’s Empirical Analysis
641 F.2d 1347 · 1981
Citation profile
50 federal appellate · 7 district · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 75 later decisions — most recently February 2015 · most notably United States v. McClintock (1984), United States v. DeLuca (1982)
50 federal appellate · 7 district · 12 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. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 2
Relies on United States v. Ventresca · Costello v. United States · County of Los Angeles v. Chavez-Salido · Bassett Furniture Industries, Inc. v. Bravman · California v. Southland Royalty Co.
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.
“It must be shown that the prosecutor's conduct significantly infringed upon the ability of the grand jury to exercise its independent judgment”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Grand Jurors, as a practical matter, however, are aware that a case is being presented to them because the prosecutor feels than an indictment is warrant ed. Thus, the fact that a prosecutor conveys such an impression to the grand jury does not require the dismissal of the indictment.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Dismissal of an indictment is required only in flagrant cases in which the grand jury has been overreached or deceived in some significant way ....”
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.