Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 852 F.2d 702 - United States v. Bay

United States v. Bay’s Empirical Analysis

852 F.2d 702 · 1988

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
August 2011
most recently cited

14 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently August 2011

14 federal appellate ·

1201988199020002010decided

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

Relies on Sorrells v. United States · Waller v. Georgia · Mathews v. United States · United States v. Downing · United States v. Hill

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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “ensure that [the defendant would] obtain the benefit of the decision in Mathews [without] giving him the windfall of a full new trial where Mathews does not require one.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “first, whether the record discloses sufficient evidence from which the jury could have found entrapment; and second, whether [the defendant] can show that he could have adduced sufficient evidence he had been given the opportunity to do so.”
    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.