United States v. Dunn’s Empirical Analysis
758 F.2d 30 · 1985
Citation profile
54 federal appellate · 6 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 68 later decisions — most recently February 2024 · most notably United States v. Zannino (1990), United States v. David (1991)
54 federal appellate · 6 district · 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. § 1951 (Hobbs Act)
Relies on Stirone v. United States · Dutton v. Evans · United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Michel v. United States · Mansion House Center South Redevelopment Co. 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 68 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A constructive amendment 'occurs when the charging terms of the indictment are altered, either literally or in effect, by prosecution or court after the grand jury has last passed upon them.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A constructive amendment is considered prejudicial per se and grounds for reversal of a conviction.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“admission of evidence of an offense not charged by the grand jury.”
3 later decisions 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.