United States v. Cunningham’s Empirical Analysis
723 F.2d 217 · 1983
Citation profile
46 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 84 later decisions — most recently March 2016 · most notably United States v. Nersesian (1987), United States v. Salameh (1998)
46 federal appellate · 2 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. § 1510 · 18 U.S.C. § 1623 · 18 U.S.C. § 3282 · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 26 U.S.C. § 6531 · 26 U.S.C. § 7201 · 26 U.S.C. § 7206
Relies on Glasser v. United States · Kotteakos v. United States · Rideout v. United States · Opper v. United States · Krulewitch v. United States
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 84 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A] trial judge [is] not entitled to set aside [a] guilty verdict simply because he would have reached a different result if he had been the fact-finder.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Cunningham now contends that the Count 11 conviction should not stand because it is possible that the jury was unanimous only as to the dismissed specification. However, his failure to object at trial to multiple specifications precludes his raising the issue on appeal.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Thus, since Sweeney participated in the unlawful activities from the beginning to the end, he would not be able, even if multiple conspiracies had been shown, to demonstrate any resulting prejudice to himself.” Ibid.”
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.