United States v. Webster’s Empirical Analysis
162 F.3d 308 · 1998
Citation profile
83 federal appellate · 11 district · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 197 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably United States of America v. Willie James Richardson (1999), United States v. Tinoco (2002)
83 federal appellate · 11 district · 10 state decisions
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. § 1201 (International Parental Kidnapping Crime Act of 1993) · 18 U.S.C. § 1952 · 18 U.S.C. § 201 (Bank Bribery Amendments) · 18 U.S.C. § 3596 (§ 60002 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994) · 18 U.S.C. § 4244 · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 848 (§ 408 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Terry v. Ohio · Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Olano · Batson v. Kentucky
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 197 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(9) Substantial planning and premeditation. — The defendant committed the offense after substantial planning and premeditation to cause the death of a person or commit an act of terrorism.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[Although race per se is an irrelevant and inadmissible factor, the effects and experiences of race may be admissible [during sentencing]. If a defendant can show that his life has been marked by discrimination or some other set of experiences, irrespective of whether the result, in part, of his race [sic], then that properly might be admissible as relevant mitigating background or character evidence. But this is a far cry from using race in and of itself as a proxy for such a set of beliefs and experiences. Pigmentation does not define a person’s character or background; the life that a person has led and the things that he has experienced do.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“A refusal to give a requested instruction constitutes reversible error only if the proposed instruction (1) is substantially correct, (2) is not substantively covered in the jury charge, and (3) pertains to an important issue in the trial, such that failure to give it seriously impairs the presentation of an effective defense.”
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.