United States v. Spitz’s Empirical Analysis
696 F.2d 916 · 1983
Citation profile
22 federal appellate · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently May 2017 · most notably United States v. McClintock (1984), United States v. Penniegraft (2011)
22 federal appellate · 10 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 18 U.S.C. § 963
Relies on Brasfield v. United States · Sincox v. United States · United States v. Edwards · United States v. Warren
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he inquiry [into numerical division] itself should be regarded as a ground for reversal. Such procedure serves no useful purpose that cannot be attained by questions not requiring the jury to reveal the nature or extent of its division. Its effect upon a divided jury will often depend upon circumstances which cannot properly be known to the trial judge or to the appellate courts and may vary widely in different situations, but in general its tendency is coercive.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. McCrimmon“the effect of what the court did in this instance, by continuing the poll for no reason at all, was to establish how the jury stood numerically. To do so was per se error.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“An exceptional circumstance may arise when there is an apparent confusion on the juror's part that may be clarified by interrogation by the court....”
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.