Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 913 F.2d 388 - United States v. Walters

United States v. Walters’s Empirical Analysis

913 F.2d 388 · 1990

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
May 2021
most recently cited

20 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently May 2021 · most notably United States v. Townsend (1991), United States v. McAnderson (1990)

20 federal appellate · 2 district ·

2701990200020102020decided

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. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 1962 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 371

Relies on Taylor v. Kentucky · United States v. Briscoe · Westinghouse Electric Corp. v. Kerr-McGee Corp. · United States v. Rollins · United States v. Martin-Trigona

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

  1. “Bloom was forced to observe his own attorneys testify about the intimate dis cussions to which he had been a party. Bloom could not pursue his own defense, but was forced to skittle along behind that of Walters. Details which Bloom chose to share with his attorney were not available to the prosecution and broadcast to the jury.... Once Walters pursued his advice-of-counsel defense, as was his right, Bloom must have been provided the option of a separate trial. Any other course forced Bloom to waive his attorney-client privilege. We cannot tolerate such devil’s bargains.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “of this interpretation. The proposition is so preposterous, however, as to be unworthy of belief. The testimony of defendant and Mr. Collins did not indicate that defendant's actions were taken in good faith based upon the advice of counsel, so that such an instruction was unwarranted. 5 Finally, defendant's theory of reliance on counsel's advice is contradicted by taxpayer's concealment of income during the taxable years. 21 6. District court's”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “the defendant in a criminal case is entitled to have the jury consider any theory of the defense which is supported by the law and which has some foundation in the evidence, however tenuous.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.