Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 13 F.3d 1381 - United States v. Demers

United States v. Demers’s Empirical Analysis

13 F.3d 1381 · 1994

Citation profile

56
cited by 56 later decisions
August 2022
most recently cited

35 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently August 2022 · most notably United States v. Rodriguez De Varon (1999), United States v. Cantrell (2006)

35 federal appellate · 1 district ·

3401994200020102020decided

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. § 3231 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291

Relies on Calder v. Job · Clampitt v. Interinsurance Exchange · United States v. Wing Fook Lui · United States v. Blaize · United States v. Lillard

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

  1. “defendant has received a lower offense level by virtue of being convicted of an offense significantly less serious than warranted by his actual criminal conduct.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “In determining whether a defendant was a minimal or a minor participant in any criminal activity, a district court sentencing a defendant . . . shall consider all conduct within the scope of 1B1.3 (Relevant Conduct), not just conduct cited in the count of conviction.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “applies where the district court determines as a factual matter that the defendant has benefitted by virtue of the relative seriousness of his offense of conviction compared to his actual criminal conduct.”
    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.