United States v. Eiland’s Empirical Analysis
741 F.2d 738 · 1984
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently September 2015
17 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. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 3481
Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Glasser v. United States · Rideout v. United States · Romano v. United States · United States v. Bell
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Defendant’s] objection to the omission of this charge had the same effect as a valid request for the instruction. We have cautioned against blindly applying the procedures for requesting or objecting instructions so as to create a “trap for the unwary.” United States v. Davis, 583 F.2d 190 , 195 (5th Cir.1978). Eiland’s objection and the court’s response ... clearly preserved the defendant’s constitutional right to an instruction on his failure to testify.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“'so clearly erroneous as to result in a likelihood of a grave miscarriage of justice.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.