United States v. Holmes’s Empirical Analysis
767 F.2d 820 · 1985
Citation profile
11 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently April 2025
11 federal appellate ·
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 Glasser v. United States · Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Weintraub · Reavis v. Antinore · Kolender v. Lawson · Brooklier 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The decision of whether to grant a mistrial lies within the sound discretion of a trial judge as he or she is in the best position to evaluate the prejudicial effect of improper testimony.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The fact that the FBI undercover agent represented a fictitious business entity is not a defense to an extortion charge.”
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.