Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 802 F.2d 373 - United States v. Greschner

United States v. Greschner’s Empirical Analysis

802 F.2d 373 · 1986

Citation profile

132
cited by 132 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
5
states following
May 2019
most recently cited

98 federal appellate · 8 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 132 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2019 · most notably United States v. Sepulveda (1993), Perry v. Leeke (1989)

98 federal appellate · 8 district · 6 state decisions

7801986199020002010decided

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. § 3006A (Criminal Justice Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2111

Relies on Davis v. Alaska · Griffin v. People of the State of Illinois · Caldwell v. Mississippi · Ake v. Oklahoma · Rideout 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 132 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “and that he had avoided life imprisonment. Merlo's testimony that Green was never facing life imprisonment tends to rebut the testimony defense counsel elicited from Green. 38 In any event, even if it were error to have allowed Merlo's testimony, such error would be harmless. The judge instructed the jurors to consider Merlo's testimony on the issue of Green's credibility alone, and not to consider what sort of sentence Rackstraw might receive. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we will presume that jurors remain”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “upon a satisfactory showing ... that the presence of the witness is necessary to an adequate defense.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “making it clear that witnesses are not only excluded from the courtroom but also that they are not to relate to other witnesses what their testimony has been and what occurred in the courtroom”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.