United States v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis
799 F.2d 134 · 1986
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently March 2010
19 federal appellate · 2 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. § 641 (Livestock Fraud Protection Act)
Relies on Santoni v. United States · S.S. Zoe Colocotroni v. Puerto Rico · Ristaino v. Ross · United States v. Dellinger · Indiana Employment Security Division v. Burney
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he essential function of voir dire is to allow for the impaneling of a fair and impartial jury through questions which permit the intelligent exercise of challenges by counsel.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Although the trial court has broad discretion in the conduct of voir dire, an abuse with resulting reversible error will occur where the court's restriction hindered defendant's opportunity to make reasonable use of his challenges”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“determining whether any of the prospective jurors [knew] the witnesses [was] clearly important to the question of the jurors' impartiality,”
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.