Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 651 F.3d 30 - United States v. Moore

United States v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis

651 F.3d 30 · 2011

Citation profile

122
cited by 122 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
15
states following
November 2025
most recently cited

39 federal appellate · 21 district · 22 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 1 U.S.C. § 1 (Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 1512 · 18 U.S.C. § 1959 · 18 U.S.C. § 1962 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 201 (Bank Bribery Amendments) · 18 U.S.C. § 3282 · 18 U.S.C. § 3500

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Jackson v. Virginia · Brady v. State of Maryland · Miller-El v. Cockrell Director Texas Department of Criminal Justice Institutional Division · Chapman v. State of California

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 122 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “could not convey what [the certifying witness] knew or observed about the events his certification concerned, i.e., the particular test and testing process he employed.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “must show two things: that his lawyer made errors “so serious that counsel was not functioning as the ‘counsel’ guaranteed the defendant by the Sixth Amendment,” and that counsel’s deficient performance was prejudicial, ie., that there is a “reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “found the manner of death to be a homicide caused by gunshot wounds”), with State v. Locklear, 363 N.C. 438 , 452, 681 S.E.2d 293 , 305 (2009) (”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.