Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 771 F.2d 621 - United States v. Aiello

United States v. Aiello’s Empirical Analysis

771 F.2d 621 · 1985

Citation profile

107
cited by 107 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
4
states following
May 2022
most recently cited

75 federal appellate · 6 district · 9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 107 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2022 · most notably Rutledge v. United States (1996), United States v. Moya-Gomez (1988)

75 federal appellate · 6 district · 9 state decisions

58019851990200020102020decided

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. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 848 (§ 408 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 952 · 28 U.S.C. § 1651

Relies on Smith v. Phillips · Linkletter v. Walker · Missouri v. Hunter · Smith v. Maryland · Remmer 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 107 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Upon learning of an unauthorized communication by a third person with a juror about a case pending before the juror, the judge must investigate the matter to determine whether the juror’s ability to perform her duty impartially has been adversely affected. The extent of that investigation and the method of conducting it will, of course, depend on the surrounding circumstances, including the content of the communication and the apparent sensitivity of the juror. The trial court must be given wide discretion to decide upon the appropriate course to take, in view of his personal observations of the jurors and the parties.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “when the state officer ... relies in good faith on pre-existing less stringent state court interpretations, we will not apply new interpretations retroactively, at least when to do so would not serve the interests of justice.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the trial judge, aided by his personal observation and appraisal of all persons concerned, may choose a private inquiry in the more relaxed atmosphere of the robing room”
    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.