United States v. Beard’s Empirical Analysis
761 F.2d 1477 · 1985
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently December 2009
14 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. § 2 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · Williamson v. United States · United States v. Fischel · United States v. Garcia
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a defendant is entitled to a special cautionary instruction on the credibility of an accomplice or a government informer if he requests it and the testimony implicating the accused is elicited solely from the informer or accomplice.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Without some such justification or explanation [by the government], we cannot sanction a contingent fee arrangement to produce evidence against particular named defendants as to crimes not yet committed.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“reward based upon a review of all services rendered”
2 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.