Grand Jury Proceedings of August 1984 in United States District Court for Central District of Illinois Springfield Division Ghibaudy’s Empirical Analysis
757 F.2d 108 · 1984
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently June 2008
9 federal appellate · 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3504 · 18 U.S.C. § 6002 · 28 U.S.C. § 1826
Relies on Kastigar v. United States · Bates v. State Bar · United States v. Dionisio · Cherek v. United States · Gelbard 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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The exception in the immunity statute allows the use of immunized testimony only in prosecutions for future perjury [i.e., perjury committed subsequent to the grant of immunity], future false statements and future failure to comply with the immunity order, not for past acts.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“reports of his prior statements to government investigators”
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.