United States v. Mucciante’s Empirical Analysis
21 F.3d 1228 · 1994
Citation profile
39 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 76 later decisions — most recently February 2025 · most notably United States v. Jacobs (1997), United States v. Studley (1995)
39 federal appellate · 2 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. § 1343 · 18 U.S.C. § 1503 · 18 U.S.C. § 1512 · 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 2314 · 18 U.S.C. § 472 · 18 U.S.C. § 479
Relies on Stirone v. United States · United States v. Miller · Shaw v. Barr · Dunn v. United States · Laughlin v. Internal Revenue Service
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 76 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A variance is immaterial — and hence not prejudicial — `where the allegation and proof substantially correspond, where the variance is not of a character that could have misled the defendant at the trial, and where the variance is not such as to deprive the accused of his right to be protected against another prosecution for the same offense.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Under section 2F1.1, loss does not always equal the actual financial harm suffered by the victim. Where the “intended” loss is greater than the “actual loss”, intended loss will be used. U.S.S.G. § 2F1.1 Application Note 7. “Under the Guidelines, ‘loss’ includes the value of all property taken, even though all or part of it was returned.” Applying these principles, [defendant’s] sentence was properly enhanced. Although he returned some of [one victim’s] money, and repaid [two other victims], he did so as part of a meretricious effort to maintain their confidences. He is therefore not entitled to credit for sums returned, or for sums spent for [the first victim’s] benefit.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“'Under section 2F1.1, loss does not always equal the actual financial harm suffered by the victim.' United States v. Mucciante, 21 F.3d 1228, 1238 (2d Cir.1994). Rather, ‘[w]here the 'intended' loss is greater than the 'actual loss,’ intended loss will be used.’ Id. (citing U.S.S.G. § 2F1.1, Application Note 7). Indeed, ‘loss in fraud cases includes the amount of property taken, even if all or part has been returned.’ United States v. Carrozzella, 105 F.3d 796, 805 (2d Cir.1997); see also Mucciante, 21 F.3d at 1238 ; United States v. Arjoon, 964 F.2d 167, 172 (2d Cir.1992); United States v. Brach, 942 F.2d 141, 143 (2d Cir.1991)”
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.