Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 682 F.2d 605 - Angel v. Overberg

Angel v. Overberg’s Empirical Analysis

682 F.2d 605 · 1982

Citation profile

143
cited by 143 later decisions
March 2011
most recently cited

108 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 143 later decisions — most recently March 2011 · most notably Lundy v. Campbell (1989), Byrd v. Collins (2000)

108 federal appellate ·

5501982199020002010decided

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 Donnelly v. DeChristoforo · Delli Paoli v. United States · Hutton v. United States · United States v. Leon · United States v. Bess

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

  1. “In every case, we consider the degree to which the remarks complained of have a tendency to mislead the jury and to prejudice the accused; whether they are isolated or extensive; whether they were deliberately or accidentally placed before the jury, and the strength of the competent proof to establish the guilt of the accused.”
    24 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “two plausible interpretations can be given to a prosecutor's ambiguous final argument, the court should not strive to adopt the one which casts doubt upon the prosecutor's intentions.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “extreme nature of prosecutorial misconduct required for a federal court to issue the writ.”
    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.