Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 657 F.2d 604 - United States v. Johnson

United States v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

657 F.2d 604 · 1981

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
December 2019
most recently cited

21 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently December 2019 · most notably United States v. Parodi (1983), United States v. McLain (1987)

21 federal appellate ·

1501981199020002010decided

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. § 1503

Relies on Remmer v. United States · United States v. Cameron · United States v. Cole · United States v. Johnson

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

  1. “fair analysis of the transcript indicates clearly that the efforts of the judge were in the interest of expediting the case, and were within the legitimate bounds of comment by the trial court in the course of the proceedings”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the judge has the right, and often an obligation, to interrupt the presentations of counsel in order to clarify misunderstandings or otherwise insure that the trial proceeds efficiently and fairly.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “without having counsel present [fell] within appropriate steps to insure a fair and impartial jury to decide 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.