United States v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis
896 F.2d 589 · 1990
Citation profile
35 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently July 2014 · most notably United States v. Wilson (1998), United States v. Boyd (1995)
35 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 Hanna v. Plumer · United States v. Inadi · United States v. Blackwell · United States v. Johnson · Walko Corp. v. Burger Chef Systems, 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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We take no position here on whether this twofold use of a single witness is legally permissible. We note, however, that settled law from the District of Columbia Court of Appeals does appear to prohibit such use. See Beach v. United States, 466 A.2d 862 (D.C. App.1983). Had this objection been properly raised and preserved, it would pose a serious issue for the court, since it is important to maintain as much commonality between this court and the D.C. courts as is possible.”
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.