Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 924 F.2d 1416 - United States v. Ashford

United States v. Ashford’s Empirical Analysis

924 F.2d 1416 · 1991

Citation profile

56
cited by 56 later decisions
6
states following
December 2021
most recently cited

36 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently December 2021 · most notably United States v. Morrison (1991), United States v. Koller (1992)

36 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

4101991200020102020decided

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. § 1708 · 18 U.S.C. § 3161 (§ 101 of the Speedy Trial Act of 1974) · 18 U.S.C. § 510

Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Barker v. Wingo · Griffin v. California · United States v. Marion · Missouri v. Continential Insurance Cos.

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

  1. “naturally and necessarily take it to be a comment on the defendant's silence.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the delay caused actual and substantial prejudice to his or her fair trial rights and that the government delayed indictment for tactical advantage or some other impermissible reason.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “) (quoting United States v. Beverly, 913 F.2d 337 , 351 (7th Cir.1990), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 111 S.Ct. 766, 112 L.Ed.2d 786 (1991)).”
    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.