United States v. Green’s Empirical Analysis
175 F.3d 822 · 1999
Citation profile
68 federal appellate · 13 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 133 later decisions — most recently July 2024 · most notably United States v. Kellam (2009), United States v. Verdin-Garcia (2008)
68 federal appellate · 13 district · 6 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. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 2518 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 851 (§ 411 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 856 (§ 416 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Franks v. Delaware · Stinson v. United States · Victor v. Nebraska
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 133 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“) is not necessarily the same as the scope of the entire conspiracy, and hence relevant conduct is not necessarily the same for every participant. In order to determine the defendant's accountability for the conduct of others under subsection (a)(1)(B), the court must first determine the scope of the criminal activity the particular defendant agreed to jointly undertake ( i.e., the scope of the specific conduct and objectives embraced by the defendant's agreement). 40 U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3 cmt. app. n. 2. This means that”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“the exercise of decision making authority, the nature of participation in the commission of the offense, the recruitment of accomplices, the claimed right to a larger share of the fruits of the crime, the degree of participation in planning or organizing the offense, the nature and scope of the illegal activity, and the degree of control and authority exercised over others. U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1, Application Note 4.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“); United States v. Sasser, 971 F.2d 470, 479 (10th Cir.1992) (affirming that direct evidence of the charged conspiracy was not 404(b) evidence and therefore did not require a limiting instruction on evidence of”
2 later decisions 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.