Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 13 F.3d 555 - United States v. Harris

United States v. Harris’s Empirical Analysis

13 F.3d 555 · 1994

Citation profile

44
cited by 44 later decisions
October 2017
most recently cited

25 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently October 2017 · most notably United States v. Maria (1999), United States v. Kassar (1995)

25 federal appellate · 1 district ·

220199420002010decided

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. § 3553 · 18 U.S.C. § 500

Relies on United States v. Thomas · United States v. Aymelek · United States v. Irabor · United States v. Stephenson

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

  1. “Ordinarily, a district court’s decision not to grant a defendant a section 3E1.1 adjustment is “entitled to great deference on review.” U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3E1.1 cmt. n. 5. “Whether the defendant has accepted responsibility is a factual question, and ‘[a] district court’s determination in this regard should not be disturbed unless it is ‘without foundation.’ ””
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “an upward departure from Criminal History Category VI, the court should structure the departure by moving 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.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “We refuse to require a “meaningless exercise” every time there is a departure. “[W]here a departure is warranted, the emphasis should be on ascertaining a fair and reasonable sentence, not on subscribing slavishly to a particular formula.” Sentencing judges should not be required to conduct unnecessary procedures.”
    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.