Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 739 F.2d 784 - United States v. Potamitis

United States v. Potamitis’s Empirical Analysis

739 F.2d 784 · 1984

Citation profile

182
cited by 182 later decisions
11
states following
March 2018
most recently cited

92 federal appellate · 4 district · 14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 182 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably United States v. Maldonado-Rivera (1990), United States v. Tarantino (1988)

92 federal appellate · 4 district · 14 state decisions — followed in 11 states

7201984199020002010decided

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. § 3 · 18 U.S.C. § 3237

Relies on Bruton v. United States · Ohio v. Roberts · Rideout v. United States · Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · 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 182 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “'where a general objective of the conspirators is money, the conspiracy does not end, of necessity, before the spoils are divided among the miscreants.'”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “‘[A] simple showing of some antagonism between the defendants’ theories of defense does not require severance.’ Separate trials are required only upon a showing that ‘the jury, in order to believe the core of testimony offered on behalf of [one] defendant, must necessarily disbelieve the testimony offered on behalf of his co-defendant.’”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[a]ny offense involving ... transportation in interstate or foreign commerce ... is a continuing offense and ... may be inquired of and prosecuted in any district from, through, or into which such commerce ... moves.”
    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.