Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 86 F.3d 719 - United States v. Boyd

United States v. Boyd’s Empirical Analysis

86 F.3d 719 · 1996

Citation profile

49
cited by 49 later decisions
13
states following
February 2020
most recently cited

22 federal appellate · 2 district · 16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently February 2020 · most notably United States v. Perez (1997), People v. Bowens (2011)

22 federal appellate · 2 district · 16 state decisions — followed in 13 states

2001996200020102020decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Indiana Southern District Court)

Relationships

Relies on United States v. Olano · Batson v. Kentucky · Johnson v. Zerbst · Faretta v. California · Cuyler v. Sullivan

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

  1. “plant an error and grow a risk-free trial”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Important social interests allow a judge to block the defense from taking certain action.... It does not follow that by violating these important social interests a defendant can help himself to a new trial.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “has ultimate authority to make certain fundamental decisions regarding the case, as to whether to plead guilty, waive a jury, testify in his or her own behalf, or take an appeal ... the remaining decisions are in the hands of counsel. It could hardly be otherwise, unless trials are to be indefinitely extended as judges ask the defendant whether each decision (or omission) meets with his pleasure. The process would be worse than cumbersome. It would undermine the defendant’s ability to entrust decisions to a legally trained person.”
    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.