Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 890 F.2d 480 - United States v. Costa

United States v. Costa’s Empirical Analysis

890 F.2d 480 · 1989

Citation profile

74
cited by 74 later decisions
7
states following
May 2025
most recently cited

51 federal appellate · 1 district · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 74 later decisions — most recently May 2025 · most notably United States v. Natanel (1991), United States v. Mala (1993)

51 federal appellate · 1 district · 7 state decisions

44019891990200020102020decided

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. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Glasser v. United States · Bibby v. United States · Daniel v. Security Pacific National Bank · In re Martin-Trigona · City of Los Angeles v. Preferred Communications, Inc.

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

  1. “[a]ny other rule would allow defendants to sandbag the court by remaining silent and gambling on a favorable verdict, knowing that if the verdict went against them, they could always obtain a new trial by later raising the issue of juror misconduct.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “a defendant's failure to raise a claim of juror bias until after trial, when the issue of potential bias was known by the defendant during trial, amounts to a waiver of the claim.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the resolution of factual issues as well as inquiries into other evidentiary matters that cannot effectively be handled for the first time by a court of appeals.”
    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.