Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 21 F.3d 243 - United States v. Fetlow

United States v. Fetlow’s Empirical Analysis

21 F.3d 243 · 1994

Citation profile

73
cited by 73 later decisions
2
states following
April 2025
most recently cited

50 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 73 later decisions — most recently April 2025 · most notably United States v. Flores (1996), United States v. Elliott (1996)

50 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

4401994200020102020decided

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. § 1952 · 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 3742 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)

Relies on Spinelli v. United States · Lane v. Peterson · Nebraska v. Wyoming · Payless Wholesale Distributor, Inc. v. Albert Culver (P.R.) Inc. · Adair v. United States

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 73 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “findings based on evidence presented at the trial phase even though no additional exhibits or testimony are introduced at the sentencing phase.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “(a) Whoever travels in interstate or foreign commerce or uses the mail or any facility in interstate or foreign commerce, with intent to ... (3) otherwise promote, manage, establish, carry on, or facilitate the promotion, management, establishment, or carrying on, of any unlawful activity ... [ 18 U.S.C.A. § 1952 (a)(3).]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[T]he essential elements of a conspiracy are an agreement with at least one other person with the objective to violate the law, coupled with one or more overt acts in furtherance of the illegal purpose.”
    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.