United States v. Jimenez-Diaz’s Empirical Analysis
659 F.2d 562 · 1981
Citation profile
48 federal appellate · 9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently November 2009 · most notably Evans v. State (1997), United States v. Darby (1984)
48 federal appellate · 9 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 Irvin v. Dowd · Bram v. United States · Bifulco v. United States · Francis v. United States · Rust 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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is axiomatic ... that “[t]he trial judge has a duty to conduct the trial carefully, patiently, and impartially. He must be above even the appearance of being partial to the prosecution.” ... On the other hand, a federal judge is not a mere moderator of proceedings.... He is a common law judge having that authority historically exercised by judges in the common law process. He may comment on the evidence, . .. may question witnesses and elicit facts not yet adduced or clarify those previously presented, . . . and may maintain the pace of the trial by interrupting or cutting off counsel as a matter of discretion.... Only when the judge’s conduct strays from neutrality is the defendant thereby denied a constitutionally fair trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“A motion for a continuance is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court, and its ruling will not be disturbed on appeal unless there is a showing that there has been an abuse of that discretion. This issue must be decided on a case by case basis in light of the circumstances presented, particularly the reasons for continuance presented to the trial court at the time the request is denied.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“We are unable to discern any prejudice. [The defendant] claims none in his briefs and pointed to none during the oral argument of this appeal. [Footnote omitted.] There is no basis to conclude that the district court abused its discretion in denying [the defendant's] motion for a continuance.”
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.