United States v. Butler’s Empirical Analysis
822 F.2d 1191 · 1987
Citation profile
44 federal appellate · 36 district · 11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 107 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably United States v. Boylan (1990), United States v. Tarantino (1988)
44 federal appellate · 36 district · 11 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 15 U.S.C. § 1611 (§ 112 of the Truth in Lending Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 2314 · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 28 U.S.C. § 293
Relies on Irvin v. Dowd · Smith v. Phillips · Remmer v. United States · Weatherford v. Bursey · New Jersey Department of Corrections v. Nash
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 107 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“need only be sufficiently detailed to permit the judge to determine whether any prejudice is likely to result.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“no problem” to the judge’s somewhat elaborate question eliciting that response. But appellant did not ask the court to clarify by additional questions whether the juror (a) understood his obligation to decide the case solely on the evidence and (b) was insisting that he could do so. The judge found the juror had stated that he could put aside the "conclusion” of his independent investigation, and we accept that finding as to what the juror asserted he could do. . The Butler court noted that no "federal appellate court [other than the Sixth Circuit had] departed from Remmer's statement of the legal standard for evaluating the effect of an improper judicial contact.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he trial judge is given great latitude to balance the institutional benefits that joint trials confer by preserving judicial and prosecutorial resources against the possibility that a defendant will be erroneously convicted because the cumulation of the evidence against all the defendants may lead the jury to be either confused or prejudiced in assessing the evidence against the particular defendant. Instructions to the jury to consider the evidence separately against each defendant ... provide significant safeguards against the dangers of prejudice.”
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.