Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 78 F.3d 1021 - United States v. Collins

United States v. Collins’s Empirical Analysis

78 F.3d 1021 · 1996

Citation profile

141
cited by 141 later decisions
1
states following
April 2025
most recently cited

70 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 141 later decisions — most recently April 2025 · most notably Byrd v. Collins (2000), United States v. Francis (1999)

70 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions

8101996200020102020decided

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) · 18 U.S.C. § 371

Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Estelle v. McGuire · United States v. Young · Bibby v. United States · Dennis 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 141 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The fear need not be the product of the defendant's actions. `It is enough if the fear exists and the defendant intentionally exploits it.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “First we determine whether a prosecutor’s conduct and remarks were improper, and then we determine whether the impropriety amounts to reversible error. As to the second part of the test, we consider whether the conduct and remarks tended to mislead the jury or to prejudice the accused; whether they were isolated or extensive; whether they were deliberately or accidentally placed before the jury; and the strength of the evidence against the accused.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.