United States v. Chorman’s Empirical Analysis
910 F.2d 102 · 1990
Citation profile
70 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 135 later decisions — most recently March 2021 · most notably United States v. Burgos (1996), United States v. Aramony (1996)
70 federal appellate · 3 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 18 U.S.C. § 2312 · 18 U.S.C. § 3572 · 18 U.S.C. § 371
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Glasser v. United States · Pinkerton v. United States · Nye & Nissen v. United States · United States v. Kissel
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 135 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“has two components: that '(1) the prosecutor's remarks ... must in fact have been improper, and (2) such remarks ... must have prejudicially affected the defendant's substantial rights so as to deprive the defendant of a fair trial.'”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he relevant question is whether, after reviewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) the degree to which the prosecutor's remarks have a tendency to mislead the jury and to prejudice the accused; (2) whether the remarks were isolated or extensive; (3) absent the remarks, the strength of competent proof introduced to establish the guilt of the accused; and (4) whether the comments were deliberately placed before the jury to divert attention to extraneous matters.”
3 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.