Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 67 F.3d 993 - United States v. Rivera-Gomez

United States v. Rivera-Gomez’s Empirical Analysis

67 F.3d 993 · 1995

Citation profile

90
cited by 90 later decisions
1
states following
January 2022
most recently cited

66 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 90 later decisions — most recently January 2022 · most notably United States v. Diaz (1999), O'Rourke v. City of Providence (2001)

66 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions

5701995200020102020decided

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. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 2119

Relies on Richardson v. Marsh · McMillan v. Pennsylvania · Francis v. Franklin · Raphan v. United States · Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Newman Oil Co.

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

  1. “(1) be fined under this Title or imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both,”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “only rarely--and in extraordinarily compelling circumstances--will we, from the vista of a cold appellate record, reverse a district court's on-the-spot judgment concerning the relative weighing of probative value and unfair effect.”
    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.