United States v. Scott’s Empirical Analysis
677 F.3d 72 · 2012
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Huddleston v. United States · United States v. Menasche · United States v. Beechum · United States v. Salameh · Triestman 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[tjhese changes are intended to be stylistic only. There is no intent to change any result in any ruling on evidence admissibility.” Fed. R.Evid. 401 advisory committee's note. See also Fed.R.Evid. 402 advisoiy committee's note (same); Fed.R.Evid. 403 advisoiy committee’s note (same); Fed.R.Evid. 608 advisory committee's note (same).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“whether (1) it was offered for a proper purpose; (2) it was relevant to a material issue in dispute; (3) its probative value is substantially outweighed by its prejudicial effect; and (4) the trial court gave an appropriate limiting instruction to the jury if so requested by the defendant.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[e]vidence of a crime, wrong, or other act is not admissible to prove a person's character in order to show that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the character,” Fed.R.Evid. 404(b)(1), but that”
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.