Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 892 F.2d 101 - United States v. Lugg

United States v. Lugg’s Empirical Analysis

892 F.2d 101 · 1989

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
5
states following
September 2018
most recently cited

30 federal appellate · 3 district · 8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2018 · most notably Mitchell v. United States (1999), Lema v. United States (1993)

30 federal appellate · 3 district · 8 state decisions

3201989199020002010decided

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. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act)

Relies on Santobello v. New York · Kastigar v. United States · Rideout v. United States · Mabry v. Johnson · Mabry v. Johnson

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

  1. “The cases are legion and uniform that only the Executive can grant statutory immunity, not a court. We are not an exception to this universal rule and have previously approved the view that 'it is not the proper business of the trial judge to inquire into the propriety of the prosecution's refusal to grant use immunity to a prospective witness.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the convicted but unsentenced defendant retains a legitimate protectable Fifth Amendment interest”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “'it is not the proper business of the trial judge to inquire into the propriety of the prosecution's refusal to grant use immunity to a prospective witness.' " 668 F.2d at 1283 (quoting United States v. Turkish, 623 F.2d 769 , 779 (2d Cir.1980) (Lombard, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1077, 101 S.Ct. 856, 66 L.Ed.2d 800 (1981)). Finally, in United States v. Lugg, we concluded that "the District Judge did not err in not granting immunity that he could not grant nor in not ordering the prosecution to grant immunity when he could not so order,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.