United States v. Dunlap’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 3 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 201 (Bank Bribery Amendments) · 18 U.S.C. § 3521 (Witness Security Reform Act of 1984) · 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 19 U.S.C. § 1619 (Tariff Act of 1930) · 26 U.S.C. § 7623 · 28 U.S.C. § 132 · 28 U.S.C. § 501
Relies on Mistretta v. United States · United States v. Russell · Hoffa v. United States · United States v. Mezzanatto · United States v. Vargas
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]t would be wholly inconsistent with this congressionally authorized practice of plea agreements that provide leniency to defendants in exchange for cooperation to hold that' Congress intended to criminalize such agreements in violation of 18 • U.S.C. § 201(c). For these reasons, this court holds that the agreements made with the government’s witnesses anti-gratuity statute. These agreements were within the express authority granted by Congress in the rules and statutes cited herein and consistent with official policy established by the Attorney General of the United States and the United States Sentencing Commission.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.