United States v. Checora’s Empirical Analysis
175 F.3d 782 · 1999
Citation profile
36 federal appellate · 6 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently December 2021 · most notably United States v. Gay (2001), United States v. Tisdale (2001)
36 federal appellate · 6 district ·
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. § 1112 · 18 U.S.C. § 3651 · 18 U.S.C. § 3663A (§ 204 of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Koon v. United States · Williams v. People of State of New York · Stinson v. United States · Chapman v. United States · United States v. Beaulieu
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 48 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“ask[s] us to interpret the Guidelines or hold the facts found by the district court are insufficient as a matter of law to warrant an enhancement, we must conduct a de novo review.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Defendants also argue the enhancement was improper because none of the evidence indicates they specifically targeted Murray because of any particular vulnerability. The argument is frivolous. We have already stated on several occasions that section 3A1.1(b) does not require a finding that the defendant intentionally targeted the victim because of the victim's vulnerability.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. United States v. Joe“[i]mpermissible double counting or cumulative sentencing occurs when the same conduct on the part of the defendant is used to support separate increases under separate enhancement provisions which necessarily overlap, are indistinct, and serve identical purposes”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.