United States v. Stevens’s Empirical Analysis
978 F.3d 565 · 1992
Citation profile
36 federal appellate · 8 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 71 later decisions — most recently February 2015 · most notably Hatch v. Oklahoma (1995), United States v. Youngpeter (1993)
36 federal appellate · 8 district · 7 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. § 751 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Bethlehem Steel Corp. v. Pemberton · Jizmejian v. United States · Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Independent Federation of Flight Attendants · Bauer v. Waldschmidt
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 71 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the evidence was discovered after trial; (2) the failure to learn of the evidence was not caused by his own lack of diligence; (3) the new evidence is not merely impeaching; (4) the new evidence is material to the principal issues involved; and (5) the new evidence is of such a nature that in a new trial it would probably produce an acquittal.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a motion for a new trial is not regarded with favor and should only be granted with great caution.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.”
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.