Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 749 F.2d 1369 - United States v. Rush

United States v. Rush’s Empirical Analysis

749 F.2d 1369 · 1984

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
2
states following
October 2017
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 4 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently October 2017 · most notably United States v. Aichele (1991), In Re Petition for Writ of Prohibition (1988)

9 federal appellate · 4 district · 2 state decisions

1401984199020002010decided

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. § 1014 · 18 U.S.C. § 1343 · 18 U.S.C. § 2314

Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · United States v. Marabelles · United States v. James · United States v. Iannelli · United States v. Ramos

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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “in exceptional cases in which the evidence preponderates heavily against the verdict.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “When the [Rule 33] motion attacks the weight of the evidence, the court’s authority is much broader than when it is deciding a motion to acquit on the ground of insufficient evidence. In deciding a motion for new trial, the district court is not constrained by the requirement that it view the evidence in the light most favorable to the government. Thus, it may evaluate the credibility of the witnesses. When the evidence weighs so heavily against the verdict that it would be unjust to enter judgment, the court should grant a new trial.”
    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.