United States v. Espinal’s Empirical Analysis
757 F.2d 423 · 1985
Citation profile
28 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently November 2014 · most notably United States v. Gifford (1994), United States v. Gendron (1994)
28 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 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 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Romano v. United States · Humble Pipe Line Co. v. Waggonner · United States v. Sherman · Kadis v. United States · United States v. Jarabek
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“When a charge is given as requested by counsel, the defects, if any, must rise to the level of plain error affecting substantial rights in order to justify reversal.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(b) Specific instances of conduct. — Specific instances of the conduct of a witness, for the purpose of attacking or supporting his credibility, other than conviction of crime as provided in rule 609, may not be proved by extrinsic evidence. They may, however, in the discretion of the court, if probative of truthfulness or untruthfulness, be inquired into on cross-examination of the witness (1) concerning his character for truthfulness or untruthfulness, or (2) concerning the character for truthfulness or untruthfulness of another witness as to which character the witness being cross-examined has testified.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“solicitation and inducement are not the same thing.”
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.