United States v. Cabrera’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 state decisions

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

1. “'[T]he ultimate question basic to all claims of entrapment' is whether the defendant was 'ready and willing to - 50 - Because the defendant, as demonstrated by his own words and actions, was willing to bribe the Chief prior to any alleged government inducement, he was predisposed to commit the charged crime and therefore not entitled to an entrapment instruction. C. The defendant argues that the jury instructions were inadequate for two additional reasons: first, for failing to require that the jury find that the defendant believed he had reached an agreement with the Chief, and second, for erroneously describing what action the defendant was required to solicit from the Chief, i.e., the "quo”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. O'Donovan

2. “in the proposed quid pro quo exchange. These claims are variations on arguments that we rejected earlier, see supra I.B.1., III.A., and we reject them here as well. With respect to the first, the defendant argues that the district court should have instructed the jury that it had to find that the defendant believed the Chief had accepted the quid pro quo offer to convict him of § 666 bribery. We explained why there was no such requirement under § 1346, and much of that reasoning commit the offense if given an opportunity to do so.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. United States v. O'Donovan