902 F. Supp. 254 - Simpson v. Reno’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently March 2011
2 federal appellate · 1 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. § 1503 · 18 U.S.C. § 242 · 18 U.S.C. § 3331 · 18 U.S.C. § 3332 · 28 U.S.C. § 1361
Relies on Pierson v. Ray · Butz v. Economou · Kerr v. United States Dist. Court for Northern Dist. of Cal. · Stump v. Sparkman · Chambers v. Nasco, 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It shall be the duty of each such grand jury impaneled within any judicial district to inquire into offenses against the criminal laws of the United States alleged to have been committed within that district. Such alleged offenses may be brought to the attention of the grand jury by the court or by any attorney appearing on behalf of the United States for the presentation of evidence. Any such attorney receiving information concerning such an alleged offense from any other person shall, if requested by such other person, inform the grand jury of such alleged offense, the identity of such other person, and such attorney’s action or recommendation.”
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.