United States v. Pazsint’s Empirical Analysis
703 F.2d 420 · 1983
Citation profile
93 federal appellate · 3 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 134 later decisions — most recently July 2021 · most notably United States v. Saunders (1989), United States v. Harrelson (1985)
93 federal appellate · 3 district · 5 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. § 111 (Federal Judiciary Protection Act of 2002)
Relies on Stirone v. United States · Starnes v. Penrod Drilling Co. · Russell v. United States · Bollenbach v. United States · Bain Jr
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 134 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“After an indictment has been returned, its charges may not be broadened through amendment — whether it be by physical alteration, jury instruction, or bill of particulars — except by the grand jury. Simply correcting an obvious clerical error or eliminating surplusage from the text of the indictment may be harmless error, but amending the indictment to charge a new crime through the jury instructions constitutes per se reversible error.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he police officer who made the recordings was acting in the regular course of business, but he had no knowledge of the truthfulness of the information being recorded, while the witnesses who gave the information which was recorded had personal knowledge but were under no business duty to report. The latter’s tape-recorded statements can not be given the presumption of reliability and regularity accorded a business record.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“consider whether the instructions as a whole were misleading or inadequate to guide the jury's determination.”
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.