Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 883 F.2d 191 - United States v. Civelli

United States v. Civelli’s Empirical Analysis

883 F.2d 191 · 1989

Citation profile

75
cited by 75 later decisions
2
states following
June 2017
most recently cited

49 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 75 later decisions — most recently June 2017 · most notably United States v. Torres (1990), United States v. Parker (1990)

49 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

4801989199020002010decided

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. § 2 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)

Relies on United States v. Frady · Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Mahan & Rowsey, Inc. v. Oklahoma Natural Gas · Pelaes v. United States · United States v. Bayer

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

  1. “a miscarriage of justice which denied the defendant a fair trial.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Counsel's further comments during colloquy with the court only compounded his earlier failure [to object], for his comments were expressions of acquiescence, not exception.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “To preserve a question for appellate review, the objection must direct the trial court's attention to the contention that is to be raised on appeal.”
    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.