United States v. Simon’s Empirical Analysis
964 F.2d 1082 · 1992
Citation profile
29 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 75 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably United States v. Calderon (1997), United States v. Turner (2007)
29 federal appellate · 3 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. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 241 (Church Arson Prevention Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 242 · 18 U.S.C. § 924
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Sandstrom v. Montana · Mullaney v. Wilbur · California v. ARC America Corp.
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 75 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"This court, in recognizing the government's burden and obligation of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, has recognized that a prosecutor's comment may be so prejudicial as to shift the burden of proof. See Duncan v. Stynchcombe, 704 F.2d 1213, 1216 (11th Cir.1983). Such prosecutorial misconduct, if `so pronounced and persistent that it permeates the entire atmosphere of the trial,' requires reversal. United States v. Alanis, 611 F.2d 123, 126 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 445 U.S. 955 , 100 S.Ct. 1607 , 63 L.Ed.2d 791 (1980) (quoting United States v. Blevins, 555 F.2d 1236 (5th Cir.1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1016 , 98 S.Ct. 733 , 54 L.Ed.2d 761 (1978)). Prosecutors must observe the distinction between the permissible practice of arguing evidence and suggesting inferences which the jury might draw from it and the impermissible practice of arguing suggestions beyond the evidence. See Houston v. Estelle, 569 F.2d 372, 380 (5th Cir.1978). Additionally, prosecutors must refrain from making burden-shifting arguments which suggest that the defendant has an obligation to produce any evidence or to prove innocence. See [ In re ] Winship, 397 U.S. [358,] at 364, 90 S.Ct. [1068,] at 1072[, 25 L.Ed.2d 368 (1970)]. We reaffirm the former Fifth Circuit's position that `the limits of proper argument find their source in notions of fairness, the same source from which flows the right to due process of law.' Houston, 569 F.2d at 380 ."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In Rivera, we held that `the government may comment on a defendant's silence if it occurred prior to the time that he is arrested and given his Miranda warnings.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[p]rosecutors must refrain from burden-shifting arguments which suggest that a defendant has an obligation to produce any evidence or to prove innocence.”
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.