Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 106 F.3d 1498 - United States v. Lowe

United States v. Lowe’s Empirical Analysis

106 F.3d 1498 · 1997

Citation profile

39
cited by 39 later decisions
August 2017
most recently cited

23 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently August 2017 · most notably United States v. Sablan (1997), United States v. Whiteskunk (1998)

23 federal appellate ·

210199720002010decided

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. § 1951 (Hobbs Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 28 U.S.C. § 455

Relies on Koon v. United States · Liteky et al United States · United States v. Rivera · In re Vey · United States v. Cooley

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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “only when [it] believes the district court would not have reached the same sentence in the absence of the error”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the Court should move incrementally down the sentencing table to the next higher offense level in criminal history category VI until it finds a guideline range appropriate to the case. USSG § 4A1.3, Policy Statement. If the sentencing table for criminal history were extended as presently structured, the criminal history score of 24 would be a level IX, or three (3) levels higher. Accordingly, the court should increase the defendant’s offense level by three (3) levels.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[i]f reliable information indicates that the criminal history category does not adequately reflect the seriousness of the defendant's past criminal conduct or the likelihood that the defendant will commit other crimes.”
    1 later decision 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.