Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 863 F.2d 185 - United States v. Gallo

United States v. Gallo’s Empirical Analysis

863 F.2d 185 · 1988

Citation profile

59
cited by 59 later decisions
1
states following
February 2016
most recently cited

27 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently February 2016 · most notably United States v. Diaz (1999), United States v. Wong (1994)

27 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions

4301988199020002010decided

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. § 1503 · 18 U.S.C. § 1951 (Hobbs Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 1952 · 18 U.S.C. § 1962 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 201 (Bank Bribery Amendments) · 18 U.S.C. § 2518 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 6002

Relies on Illinois v. Gates · Alderman v. United States · Kastigar v. United States · United States v. Harris · National Labor Relations Board v. International Longshoremen's Ass'n

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

  1. “In order to demonstrate an abuse of this discretion, a defendant bears the “extremely difficult burden” of showing that substantial prejudice resulted from the denial of the motion. United States v. Werner, 620 F.2d 922, 928 (2d Cir.1980). It must further be shown that the prejudice resulted from the joinder, not merely that the defendant “might have had a better chance for acquittal at a separate trial.” United States v. Rucker, 586 F.2d 899, 902 (2d Cir.1978).”
    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.