United States v. Camacho’s Empirical Analysis
955 F.2d 950 · 1992
Citation profile
34 federal appellate · 3 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently June 2024 · most notably United States of America v. Anthony Gibbs Richard Hough Donneto Berry Chad Gibbs Robert Curtis Lamont Needum Antwan Woods (1999), United States v. Alvarez (2004)
34 federal appellate · 3 district · 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.
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1344 · 18 U.S.C. § 656
Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Johnson v. Zerbst · Faretta v. California · Illinois v. Allen · Snyder v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts
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.
“has traditionally been understood to codify both a defendant's constitutional right and his common law right to presence.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“at all stages of the trial where his absence might frustrate the fairness of the proceedings.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““It is of the utmost importance that the defendant be present when the jury is being selected. . . . [T]he de fendant has unique knowledge which is important at all stages of the trial, including voir dire. ... He may . . . have knowledge of facts about himself or the alleged crime which may not have seemed relevant to him in the tranquility of his lawyer’s office, and thus may not have been disclosed, but which may become important as the individual prejudices or inclinations of the jurors are revealed. He may also be a member of the community in which he will be tried and might be sensitive to particular local prejudices his lawyer does not know about.””
2 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.