United States v. Prati’s Empirical Analysis
861 F.2d 82 · 1988
Citation profile
56 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 64 later decisions — most recently May 2016 · most notably United States v. Gaytan (1996), United States v. Hernandez-Guevara (1998)
56 federal appellate · 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 21 U.S.C. § 801 (§ 101 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1865
Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Blockburger v. United States · Carroll v. United States · United States v. Cortez · United States v. Ross
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 64 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]e reject the notion that the loss of a peremptory challenge constitutes a violation of the constitutional right to an impartial jury. We have long recognized that peremptory challenges are not of constitutional dimension. They are a means to achieve the end of an impartial jury. So long as the jury that sits is impartial, the fact that the defendant had to use a peremptory challenge to achieve that result does not mean the Sixth Amendment was violated. We conclude that no violation of petitioner’s right to an impartial jury occurred.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“must demonstrate that the charge, considered as a whole, is so clearly erroneous as to result in a likelihood of a grave miscarriage of justice.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“A warrantless search of an automobile is permissible where ... officers have probable cause to believe the vehicle contains contraband.”
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.