United States v. Walker’s Empirical Analysis
772 F.2d 1172 · 1985
Citation profile
46 federal appellate · 2 district · 22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 105 later decisions — most recently December 2022 · most notably United States v. Paz (1991), United States v. Jones (1989)
46 federal appellate · 2 district · 22 state decisions — followed in 12 states
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. § 1343 · 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 952
Relies on Faretta v. California · Powell v. State of Alabama Patterson · Harris v. New York · Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Newman Oil Co. · United States v. District Court
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 105 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In exercising its discretion, the court must consider the timeliness of the motion, the character of the testimony, and the effect of the granting of the motion. The party moving to reopen should provide a reasonable explanation for failure to present the evidence in its case-in-chief. The evidence proffered should be relevant, admissible, technically adequate, and helpful to the jury in ascertaining the guilt or innocence of the accused. The belated receipt of such testimony should not imbue the evidence with distorted importance, prejudice the opposing party’s case, or preclude an adversary from having an adequate opportunity to meet the additional evidence offered.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Where the very point of a trial is to determine whether an individual was involved in criminal activity, the testimony of the individual himself must be considered of prime importance.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“afforded him the opportunity to have the jury observe his demeanor and judge his veracity firsthand.”
5 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.