United States v. Shaw’s Empirical Analysis
701 F.2d 367 · 1983
Citation profile
154 federal appellate · 4 district · 27 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 230 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2020 · most notably Greer v. Miller (1987), Montgomery v. State (1991)
154 federal appellate · 4 district · 27 state decisions — followed in 17 states
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. § 111 (Federal Judiciary Protection Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 1111 · 18 U.S.C. § 113 · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 924
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Terry v. Ohio · Glasser v. United States · Johnson v. Zerbst
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 230 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The alternative tests for determining whether a prosecutor’s or witness’s remarks constitute comment on a defendant’s silence are whether the “manifest intent” was to comment on the defendant’s silence or, alternatively, whether the character of the remark was such that the jury would “naturally and necessarily” construe it as a comment on the defendant’s silence. Both the intent of the prosecutor and the character of the remarks are determined by reviewing the context in which they occur, and the burden of proving such intent is on the defendant.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[m]urder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. Every murder perpetrated by poison, lying in wait, or any other kind of willful, deliberate, malicious, and premeditated killing ... is murder in the first degree. Any other murder is murder in the second degree.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a defendant may be convicted of two separate offenses arising from a single act so long as each requires proof of fact not essential to the other.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Arnold v. Zavaras · State v. Ganal
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.