United States v. Chavez’s Empirical Analysis
119 F.3d 342 · 1997
Citation profile
29 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently January 2023 · most notably 204 Ill. 2d 159 - People v. Donoho (2003), United States v. Hernandez-Guevara (1998)
29 federal appellate · 1 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. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Santoni v. United States · Henderson v. Brown · Jacobson v. United States · United States v. Beechum · Nebraska v. Wyoming
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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the extent to which the defendant's unlawful intent is established by other evidence, the overall similarity of the extrinsic and charged offenses, and the amount of time that separates the extrinsic and charged offenses.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the task for the court . . . calls for a commonsense assessment of all the circumstances surrounding the extrinsic offense.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“You have heard evidence of acts which may be similar to those charged in the Indictment, but which were committed on other occasions. You must not consider any of this evidence in deciding if the Defendant committed the acts charged in the Indictment. However, you may consider this evidence for other very limited purposes. If you find beyond a reasonable doubt, from other evidence in this case, that the Defendant did commit the acts charged in the Indictment, then you may consider evidence of the similar acts allegedly committed on other occasions to determine: Number one, whether the Defendant had the state of mind or intent necessary to commit the crimes charged in the indictment....”
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.