United States v. Maccini’s Empirical Analysis
721 F.2d 840 · 1983
Citation profile
43 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2017 · most notably United States v. Young (1985), United States v. Rodriguez-Estrada (1989)
43 federal appellate · 4 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. § 1001 (Comprehensive Thrift and Bank Fraud Prosecution and Taxpayer Recovery Act of 1990) · 18 U.S.C. § 371
Relies on Berger v. United States · United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co. · Bates v. State Bar · United States Parole Commission v. Geraghty · United States v. Dansker
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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) whether the prosecutor's conduct was isolated and/or deliberate; (2) whether the trial judge's instructions were strong and explicit; and (3) whether it is likely that any prejudice that survived the judge's instructions could have affected the outcome of the case.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“strong curative instructions were sufficient to correct”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“That despite our consistent warnings to the Government we should still be called upon to admonish against such conduct is reprehensible per se because it constitutes a disregard to our directives. But additionally it is particularly pernicious because it results in an unnecessary waste of judicial resources, both at the trial and appellate level, by diversion and attention to review of what by now should be understood to be totally unacceptable conduct by those who lay claim to representing the Government of the United States.”
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.