United States v. Downs’s Empirical Analysis
123 F.3d 637 · 1997
Citation profile
22 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently March 2013 · most notably United States v. Diaz-Diaz (1998), United States v. Alden (2008)
22 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
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · United States v. Olano · Stinson v. United States · Osborne v. Brown · Wyshak v. American Savings Bank, F.A.
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]e doubt that defendants should be allowed to buy reduced sentences by repaying the victims of their fraudulent schemes.”); Lucas, 99 F.3d at 1299 (”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.