United States v. Eldridge’s Empirical Analysis
984 F.2d 943 · 1993
Citation profile
68 federal appellate · 6 district · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 101 later decisions — most recently September 2025 · most notably United States v. Cannon (1996), United States v. Thomas (1996)
68 federal appellate · 6 district · 12 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 924
Relies on United States v. Young · United States v. Matlock · Scott v. United States · Raphan v. United States · Lane v. Peterson
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 101 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“When a defendant argues that the prosecution made improper remarks during closing arguments, the allegedly improper statements will be examined within the context of the entire trial to determine first whether the remarks were in fact improper, and second whether the remarks were so offensive so as to deprive the defendant of a fair trial.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[A] driver of a vehicle has the authority to consent to a search of that vehicle.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Flores · People v. Minor“[i]f an arguably improper statement made during closing argument is not objected to by defense counsel, we will only reverse under exceptional circumstances.”
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.