United States v. Johns’s Empirical Analysis
734 F.2d 657 · 1984
Citation profile
23 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently May 2025 · most notably United States v. Bailey (1997), United States v. Laury (1993)
23 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 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
Relies on Doyle v. Ohio · United States v. Hasting · CPC International Inc. v. Dimmitt Agri Industries, Inc. · United States v. Mitchell · Central Illinois Public Service Co. 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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The low credibility the prosecutor suggested the jury accord the defense experts’ testimony and the alibi testimony arose from the evidence. The prosecutor' did not place the credibility of his office behind his own witnesses. At most he merely attempted to rebut aspersions the defense had cast on those witnesses; he pointed out features of their own testimony that supported their credibility. He did not express personal opinions about the witnesses. Rather, he urged the jury to draw inferences and conclusions from the evidence produced at trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The [issue] is whether for some policy reasons we should not allow the prosecutor to present otherwise admissible evidence to the jury. For example, when a defendant does not tell police his alibi, we prohibit such argument for Miranda reasons. See Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610 , 96 S.Ct. 2240 , 49 L.Ed.2d 91 (1976). We find no similar policy that would prevent our allowing the prosecutor to attack an alibi witness' credibility by pointing out that he did not come forward until trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[A]n attorney’s statements that indicate his opinion or knowledge of the case as theretofore presented before the court and jury are permissible if the attorney makes it clear that the conclusions he is urging are conclusions to be drawn from the evidence.”
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.