United States v. Rodriguez’s Empirical Analysis
812 F.2d 414 · 1987
Citation profile
46 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 76 later decisions — most recently January 2013 · most notably United States v. Erdman (1992), United States v. Davis (1996)
46 federal appellate · 2 district · 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. § 2
Relies on Glasser v. United States · Holland v. United States · Dames & Moore v. Regan · United States of America v. Ramon Jorge Laguardia and Marina Hidalgo Gato. · United States v. Lincoln
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 76 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““When a motion for a new trial is made on the ground that the verdict is contrary to the weight of the evidence, the issues are far different from those raised by a motion for judgment of acquittal. The question is whether he is entitled to a new trial. In assessing the defendant’s right to a new trial, the court must weigh the evidence and in doing so evaluate for itself the credibility of the witnesses.” United States v. Lincoln, 630 F.2d [1313,] 1316 [ (8th Cir.1980) ]. The court will only set aside the verdict if the evidence weighs heavily enough against the verdict that a miscarriage of justice may have occurred.”
15 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“When the [Rule 33] motion attacks the weight of the evidence, the court’s authority is much broader than when it is deciding a motion to acquit on the ground of insufficient evidence. In deciding a motion for new trial, the district court is not constrained by the requirement that it view the evidence in the light most favorable to the government. Thus, it may evaluate the credibility of the witnesses. When the evidence weighs so heavily against the verdict that it would be unjust to enter judgment, the court should grant a new trial.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“to fix prices and allocate the market had been reached; and (5) evidence regarding activities which predated the period covered by the statute of limitations. 14 Appellants argue that the district court abused its discretion in allowing the government to introduce evidence of the guilty pleas of Walker and another distributor, Superior Sales of Nebraska (”
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.