Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 883 F.2d 608 - United States v. Capozzi

United States v. Capozzi’s Empirical Analysis

883 F.2d 608 · 1989

Citation profile

55
cited by 55 later decisions
8
states following
August 2013
most recently cited

32 federal appellate · 3 district · 9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently August 2013 · most notably State v. Landrum (1990), United States v. Morrow (1991)

32 federal appellate · 3 district · 9 state decisions

4001989199020002010decided

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. § 1006 · 18 U.S.C. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 1343 · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 18 U.S.C. § 6001 · 18 U.S.C. § 6002

Relies on Washington v. Texas · McNally v. United States · California State Board of Equalization v. Western Marina Corp. · Lisenba v. People of State of California · Santoni v. United States

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

  1. “[e]very court of appeals which has considered the question [of court granted immunity] has rejected the Third Circuit's Smith holding as being a violation of the doctrine of separation of powers.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “it is clear that such an order is an extraordinary remedy, to be used sparingly, and then only where the proffered evidence is 'clearly exculpatory.'”
    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.