United States v. Gregory’s Empirical Analysis
891 F.2d 732 · 1989
Citation profile
52 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 87 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2015 · most notably Carter v. United States (2000), United States v. Salvo (1998)
52 federal appellate · 2 district · 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 18 U.S.C. § 2113 · 18 U.S.C. § 3013
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Neil v. Biggers · Schmuck v. United States · Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs v. Broyles · United States v. Booth
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 87 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 31(c) provides that '[t]he defendant may be found guilty of an offense necessarily included in the offense charged.' Whether one offense is 'necessarily included' in another is reviewed de novo.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“) for two counts of bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113 (a). Ralston contends that the district court erred by refusing to instruct the jury on the offense of bank larceny and by sentencing him as a career offender under the Guidelines, and that his motion for continuance of sentencing should have been granted. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm. 3 * Jury Instructions 4”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“' [T]he opportunity of the witness to view the criminal at the time of the crime, the witness' degree of attention, the accuracy of the witness' prior description of the criminal, the level of certainty demonstrated by the witness at the confrontation, and the length of time between the crime and the confrontation.'”
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.