United States v. Webster’s Empirical Analysis
769 F.2d 487 · 1985
Citation profile
21 federal appellate · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently March 2016 · most notably Duckett v. Godinez (1995), United States v. Griffin (1990)
21 federal appellate · 5 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. § 2113
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Rhode Island v. Innis · Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Newman Oil Co. · Tatum v. United States · Perez 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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“If the jury found that Hicks' post arrest statement was true, or if it raised a reasonable doubt regarding his presence at the scene of the robbery, then the jury was bound to find Hicks not guilty. Thus the government's own evidence may well have provided an effective alibi defense. * * * * * * While we agree that the evidence would not have been admissible if offered by Hicks, we do not think that ... only evidence admissible if offered by a defendant may serve as the foundation for a defense instruction.... [T]he government sought to prove the statement it introduced to be untrue rather than true. By offering evidence of what the government contends was a false exculpatory statement, the government put the truth of that statement in issue. Id. (emphasis added).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Although her [defendant’s mother] testimony was admittedly not precise with respect to the time, we think her testimony that appellant was asleep “all morning” was sufficient to put into question whether appellant was present at the scene of the ... [crime].”
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.