United States v. Babb’s Empirical Analysis
807 F.2d 272 · 1986
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 3 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently September 2021 · most notably United States v. Santana (1993), United States v. Osorio (1991)
19 federal appellate · 3 district · 4 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. § 1623 · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on United States v. Hasting · Counselman v. Hitchcock · Lopez v. United States · United States v. Mandujano · United States v. Washington
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“be the substantive equivalent of self-incrimination.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he failure of the witness to understand the privilege against self-incrimination will not require the subsequent suppression of the witness's concededly false statements.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“It is firmly settled that the prospect of being indicted does not entitle a witness to commit perjury, and witnesses who are not grand jury targets are protected from compulsory self-incrimination to the same extent as those who are. Because target witness status neither enlarges nor diminishes the constitutional protection against compelled self-incrimination, potential-defendant warnings add nothing of value to protection of Fifth Amendment rights.”
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.