United States v. Warwick’s Empirical Analysis
167 F.3d 965 · 1999
Citation profile
37 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 72 later decisions — most recently January 2019 · most notably United States v. Layne (1999), United States v. Combs (2004)
37 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 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. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Bailey v. United States · United States v. Russell · Smith v. United States · United States v. Brown
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 72 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Since Tucker , we have consistently rejected defendants’ attempts to argue that the government’s conduct in inducing them to commit the crimes charged was so outrageous as to deprive them of their constitutional rights. See, e.g., United States v. Rogers, 118 F.3d 466, 473 (6th Cir.1997) (noting that a defense that sounds in inducement is limited to entrapment and, under Tucker , does not implicate due process); United States v. Branham, 97 F.3d 835, 852 (6th Cir.1996) (noting that Tucker “rejected the ‘due- process’ defense sounding in inducement,” and therefore refusing to consider the defendant’s claim of outrageous government conduct).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Blackmon“`A defendant claiming insufficiency of the evidence bears a very heavy burden.... Circumstantial evidence alone is sufficient to sustain a conviction and such evidence need not remove every reasonable hypothesis except that of guilt.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a] defendant who does nothing more than accept a weapon offered to him by an undercover officer cannot be said to 'actively' do anything with that weapon because receipt and acceptance is inherently passive conduct.”
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.