United States v. Mabry’s Empirical Analysis
809 F.2d 671 · 1987
Citation profile
42 federal appellate · 14 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 64 later decisions — most recently November 2006 · most notably United States v. Sullivan (1990), United States v. Wicks (1993)
42 federal appellate · 14 district · 3 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. § 2 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 843 (§ 403 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Brady v. State of Maryland · Illinois v. Gates · Franks v. Delaware · United States v. Bagley
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 64 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Severance is a matter of discretion, not of right, and the defendant bears a heavy burden of demonstrating prejudice to his case.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[Tjthe Southern District of Texas was the only district in which (at least absent further evidence) venue was initially proper as to all counts. While this does not prevent a Rule 21(b) transfer of all counts to another district, it is at least an indication that the government's selection of the forum was not arbitrary. We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Fagan's Rule 21(b) motion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“experience had taught that if the [drug] sellers did not return to the residence of the source within a short period of time, the supplier would either proceed to destroy the cocaine on the premises and secret the cash or depart the premises with the cocaine and the cash’’); United States v. Webster, 750 F.2d 307 (5th Cir.1984) (warrantless search justified in course of”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Hutchins
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.