United States v. Horton’s Empirical Analysis
921 F.2d 540 · 1990
Citation profile
56 federal appellate · 5 district · 19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 124 later decisions — most recently August 2019 · most notably United States v. Higgs (2003), United States v. Ellis (1997)
56 federal appellate · 5 district · 19 state decisions — followed in 11 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. § 1111 · 18 U.S.C. § 2
Relies on Nye & Nissen v. United States · Bollenbach v. United States · United States v. Peoni · Andres v. United States · United States v. Williams
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.
“advance notice of the aiding and abetting instruction would not have altered the tenor or substance of [Ruby Locklear's] initial closing.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“inform counsel of its proposed action upon [instruction] requests prior to their arguments to the jury”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Simply put, 'aiding and abetting means to assist the perpetrator of the crime.'”
5 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.