United States v. Cuozzo’s Empirical Analysis
962 F.2d 945 · 1992
Citation profile
86 federal appellate · 3 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 133 later decisions — most recently April 2017 · most notably United States v. Baker (1993), United States v. Koon (1994)
86 federal appellate · 3 district · 4 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. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 1343 · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 18 U.S.C. § 473
Relies on Allen v. United States · Huddleston v. United States · Rideout v. United States · Sloan v. Hicks · Lowenfield v. Phelps
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 133 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the form of the jury charge, the period of deliberation following the charge, the total time of deliberation, and other indicia of coerciveness or pressure.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“bears the burden of proving that a joint trial causes such 'clear,' 'manifest,' or 'undue' prejudice that the accused is denied a fair trial.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“we consider whether the instruction, taken in its context, had a coercive effect.”
3 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.