United States v. Dring’s Empirical Analysis
930 F.2d 687 · 1991
Citation profile
66 federal appellate · 3 district · 13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 122 later decisions — most recently August 2020 · most notably United States v. Ramirez-Jiminez (1992), United States v. Santiago (1995)
66 federal appellate · 3 district · 13 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
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Bagley · Neil v. Biggers · United States v. Agurs · Manson v. Brathwaite
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 122 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“' [T]he opportunity of the witness to view the criminal at the time of the crime, the witness' degree of attention, the accuracy of the witness' prior description of the criminal, the level of certainty demonstrated by the witness at the confrontation, and the length of time between the crime and the confrontation.'”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“must at least make a plausible showing that the [evidence] ... would have been material and favorable to his defense, in ways not cumulative to [other evidence].”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[I]ndirect attacks on truthfulness include opinion evidence, reputation evidence, and evidence of corruption, which require the jury to infer that the witness is lying at present simply because he has lied often in the past.”
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.