United States v. Diaz’s Empirical Analysis
245 F.3d 294 · 2001
Citation profile
42 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 90 later decisions — most recently February 2025 · most notably United States v. Wise (2008), United States v. Lessner (2007)
42 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 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
Relies on Koon v. United States · United States v. Bertoli · United States v. Menon · United States v. Bogusz
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 90 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he sentencing court no longer uses the Statutory Index (Appendix A) as an aid in finding the most applicable guideline among several possibilities; the Statutory Index (Appendix A) now conclusively points the court to the one guideline applicable in a given case.” United States v. Diaz, 245 F.3d 294 , 302 (3d Cir. 2001) (emphasis in original). 7 . If the offense involved a conspiracy, attempt, or solicitation, the sentencing court is also instructed to”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In cases ... in which several counts, including fraud and money laundering, have been grouped, ... the count carrying the highest applicable offense level must apply to the entire group for sentencing purposes. Under the guidelines as amended, ... courts have no discretion to decide that the money laundering guideline is inappropriate or not the most applicable guideline on the facts of a given case.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Under the sentencing guidelines, the District Court must group the counts into a single unit when there are multiple counts all involving substantially the same harm to the same victim and two or more acts or transactions connected by a common criminal objective or constituting part of a common scheme or plan. The victim in all of Diaz's offenses was the same, the DOE. All of her acts were part of a common plan.”
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.