United States v. Sustaita’s Empirical Analysis
1 F.3d 950 · 1993
Citation profile
34 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 64 later decisions — most recently November 2017 · most notably United States v. Davila-Escovedo (1994), United States v. Soltero (2007)
34 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Moody v. Smith · United States v. Restrepo · United States v. Petty · United States v. Redondo-Lemos
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 64 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The use of hearsay evidence at sentencing violates due process only if the sentencing judge relied upon information which is materially false or unreliable.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A sentencing judge 'may consider a wide variety of information which would not be considered admissible at trial.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“if it is clear that no prejudice resulted”
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.