United States v. Wright’s Empirical Analysis
665 F.3d 560 · 2012
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 1346 · 18 U.S.C. § 3231 · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291
Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Neder v. United States · United States v. Gaudin · Evans v. United States · Skilling v. United States
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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“whether (1) the charges are intertwined with each other; (2) the evidence for the remaining counts is sufficiently distinct to support the verdict on these counts; (3) the elimination of the invalid count [will] significantly change[ ] the strategy of the trial; and (4) the prosecution used language of the sort to arouse a jury.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he jury heard evidence that would have been inadmissible at a trial limited”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“ask whether that evidence (the 'spillover evidence') was prejudicial.”
3 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.