United States v. Madrid’s Empirical Analysis
842 F.2d 1090 · 1988
Citation profile
63 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 87 later decisions — most recently November 2016 · most notably United States v. Angiulo (1990), United States v. Endicott (1989)
63 federal appellate · 1 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 · 18 U.S.C. § 1951 (Hobbs Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 1955 · 18 U.S.C. § 1961 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 1962 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 1965 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 3282 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291
Relies on Sedima Sprl v. Imrex Company Inc · Smith v. Phillips · Remmer v. United States · Rushen v. Spain · California v. Civil Aeronautics Board
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 87 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'uniquely qualified to appraise the probable effect of information on the jury, the materiality of the extraneous material, and its prejudicial nature.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“resulting from an ex parte contact to receive a new trial. United States v. Madrid, 842 F.2d at 1093 . Further, Remmer v. United States, 350 U.S. 377 (1956) (”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Remmer II ") did not require a district court to call for a new trial on finding that an ex parte contact presented a "reasonable possibility”
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.