United States v. Guy W. Olano, Jr., United States of America v. Raymond M. Gray’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
41 federal appellate · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2022 · most notably United States v. Olano (1993), State v. Jackson (2001)
41 federal appellate · 8 state decisions
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.
Appellate journey
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1006 · 18 U.S.C. § 1014 · 18 U.S.C. § 1343 · 18 U.S.C. § 2314 · 18 U.S.C. § 3146 (Bail Reform Act of 1984) · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 18 U.S.C. § 657
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Pereira v. United States · Patterson v. United States · McNally v. United States · S.S. Zoe Colocotroni v. Puerto Rico
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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the district court did not obtain individual waivers from each defendant personally, either orally or in writing.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The court may direct that not more than 6 jurors in addition to the regular jury be called and impanelled to sit as alternate jurors. Alternate jurors in the order in which they are called shall replace jurors who, prior to the time the jury retires to consider its verdict, become or are found to be unable or disqualified to perform their duties. . . . An alternate juror who does not replace a regular juror shall be discharged after the jury retires to consider its verdict.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“We cannot fairly ascertain whether in a given case the alternate jurors followed the district court's prohibition on participation. However, even if they heeded the letter of the court's instructions and remained orally mute throughout, it is entirely possible that their attitudes, conveyed by facial expressions, gestures or the like, may have had some effect upon the decision of one or more jurors.”
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.