United States v. Comosona’s Empirical Analysis
848 F.2d 1110 · 1988
Citation profile
46 federal appellate · 16 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 82 later decisions — most recently March 2015 · most notably Collazo v. Estelle (1991), United States v. Morgan (1991)
46 federal appellate · 16 district · 6 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. § 1112 · 18 U.S.C. § 113 · 18 U.S.C. § 1153
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Brady v. State of Maryland · Johnson v. Zerbst · Barker v. Wingo · Edwards v. Arizona
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 82 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The Government has no obligation to disclose possible theories of the defense to a defendant. If a statement does not contain any expressly exculpatory material, the Government need not produce that statement to the defense. To hold otherwise would impose an insuperable burden on the Government to determine what facially non-exculpatory evidence might possibly be favorable to the accused by inferential reasoning. We are confident that the Supreme Court did not intend the Brady holding to sweep so broadly.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the absence of cumulative testimony cannot, as a matter of law, result in actual prejudice.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the delay was purposefully designed to gain tactical advantage or to harass.”
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.