United States v. Doe’s Empirical Analysis
903 F.2d 16 · 1990
Citation profile
70 federal appellate · 4 district · 21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 124 later decisions — most recently July 2023 · most notably 6 Cal. 4th 585 - People v. Cudjo (1993), United States v. North (1990)
70 federal appellate · 4 district · 21 state decisions — followed in 13 states
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. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 292
Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Batson v. Kentucky · Bruton v. United States · Berger v. United States · United States v. Young
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 124 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“unembellished reference to evidence of race [or ethnicity] simply as a factor bolstering an eyewitness identification of a culprit.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“therefore reducing the appeal to juror bias. Id. at 19. 49 The D.C. Circuit rejected this explanation, finding the references to Jamaicans in a trial involving Jamaican defendants to be reversible error: 50 It is much too late in the day to treat lightly the risk that racial bias may influence a jury's verdict in a criminal case. We refuse to quibble, as does the Government, over whether the remarks about Jamaicans during Rawls' testimony referred strictly to race, for it simply does not matter. In legal theory, distinction based upon ancestry are as”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence,”
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.