United States v. Marszalkowski’s Empirical Analysis
669 F.2d 655 · 1982
Citation profile
72 federal appellate · 1 district · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 100 later decisions — most recently November 2012 · most notably United States v. Alvarez (1985), United States v. Pepe (1984)
72 federal appellate · 1 district · 12 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 46
Relies on Glasser v. United States · Wong Sun v. United States · Mapp v. Ohio · Payton v. New York · Stovall v. Denno
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 100 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Inherent in every joint trial is, of necessity, some degree of bias. Only in the event such prejudice appears to be compelling does severance become warranted.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(b) Joinder of Defendants. Two or more defendants may be charged in the same indictment or information if they are alleged to have participated in the same act or transaction or in the same series of acts or transactions constituting an offense or offenses. Such defendants may be charged in one or more counts together or separately and all of the defendants need not be charged in each count.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the high purity of the cocaine found ..., along with the recovery from [defendant's] apartment of substance used to cut cocaine, a large amount of cash ($10,500.00) and a weapon ... constitute[d] surrounding circumstances from which [defendant's] intent to distribute [was] readily inferrable”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Cherry
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.