United States v. Outler’s Empirical Analysis
659 F.2d 1306 · 1981
Citation profile
63 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 87 later decisions — most recently July 2016 · most notably United States v. Steele (1998), McCoy v. United States (2001)
63 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 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
Relies on Russell v. United States · Beck v. Washington · Hartman v. United States · Williams v. United States · Piper v. Chris-Craft Industries, Inc.
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 87 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“depri[ving] the defendant of a basic protection which the guarantee of the intervention of a grand jury was designed to secure.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[N]o need for a severance exists until the defendant makes a convincing showing that he has both important testimony to give concerning one count and strong need to refrain from testifying on the other. In making such a showing, it is essential that the defendant present enough information — regarding the nature of the testimony he wishes to give on one count and his reasons for not wishing to testify on the other — to satisfy the court that the claim of prejudice is genuine and to enable it intelligently to weigh the considerations of “economy and expedition in judicial administration” against the defendant’s interest in having a free choice with respect to testifying.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Counts One through Fifteen involved charges of prescribing or, in the language of the [Controlled Substances Act], 'dispensing' controlled drugs.”
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.