United States v. Maker’s Empirical Analysis
751 F.2d 614 · 1984
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 6 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2013 · most notably United States v. De Peri (1985), State v. Hampton (2012)
24 federal appellate · 6 district · 8 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. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 1623 · 18 U.S.C. § 3731
Relies on Kotteakos v. United States · Burks v. United States · Green v. United States · United States v. Jorn · Starnes v. Penrod Drilling Co.
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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“we [can] affirm the district court on any basis which finds support in the record.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a case in which the district court, as the result of a legal error, determined that the government could not prove a fact that is not necessary to support a conviction. To preclude an appeal in this case would deprive the public "of its valued right to `one complete opportunity to convict those who have violated its laws.'" [ Id., citing United States v. Scott, 437 U.S. 82 at 100 , 98 S.Ct. 2187 at 2198 , 57 L.Ed. 2d 65 (1978) (quoting Arizona v. Washington, 434 U.S. 497, 509 , 98 S.Ct. 824, 832 , 54 L.Ed. 2d 717 (1975)].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The underlying idea, one that is deeply ingrained in at least the Anglo-American system of jurisprudence, is that the State with all its resources and power should not be allowed to make repeated attempts to convict an individual for an alleged offense, thereby subjecting him to embarrassment, expense and ordeal and compelling him to live in a continuing state of anxiety and insecurity, as well as enhancing the possibility that even though innocent he may be found guilty.”
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.