United States v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

15 federal appellate · 1 district ·

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

1. “(a) When counts involve the same victim and the same act or transaction. (b) When counts involve the same victim and two or more acts or transactions connected by a common criminal objective or constituting part of a common scheme or plan. (c) When one of the counts embodies conduct that is treated as a specific offense characteristic in, or other adjustment to, the guideline applicable to another of the counts. (d) When the offense level is determined largely on the basis of the total amount of harm or loss, the quantity of a substance involved, or some other measure of aggregate harm, or if the offense behavior is ongoing or continuous in nature and the offense guideline is written to cover such behavior.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 25 F. Supp. 2d 136 - United States v. Harpaul · Weinberger v. United States

2. “there is no automatic grouping of counts [under subsection 3D1.2(d)] simply because those counts are on the `are to be grouped' list.”

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

3. “of the same general type and otherwise meet the criteria for grouping under [subsection d].”

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