Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 784 F.2d 161 - United States v. Wright-Barker

United States v. Wright-Barker’s Empirical Analysis

784 F.2d 161 · 1986

Citation profile

136
cited by 136 later decisions
8
states following
March 2022
most recently cited

82 federal appellate · 12 district · 9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 136 later decisions — most recently March 2022 · most notably United States v. Brockington (1988), United States v. McGlory (1992)

82 federal appellate · 12 district · 9 state decisions

75019861990200020102020decided

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 14 U.S.C. § 89 · 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 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. § 952 · 21 U.S.C. § 955A

Relies on United States v. Frady · Blanton v. General Electric Credit Corp. · Bowsher v. Merck & Co. · Salem v. United States Lines Company · CPC International Inc. v. Dimmitt Agri Industries, Inc.

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 136 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “of public offices or agencies, setting forth ... matters observed pursuant to duty imposed by law as to which matters there was a duty to report, excluding, however, in criminal cases matters observed by police officers and other law enforcement personnel.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “'Congress has not thought it necessary to make specific provision in the law that the locus shall include the high seas and foreign countries, but allows it to be inferred from the nature of the offense.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “an opening statement is an objective summary of evidence [counsel] reasonably expects to produce, a subsequent failure in proof will not necessarily result in a mistrial.”
    2 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.