United States v. Young’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

14 federal appellate · 1 district ·

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

1. “All counts involving substantially the same harm shall be grouped together into a single Group. Counts involve substantially the same harm within the meaning of this rule: (a) When counts involve the same victim and the same act or transaction. (b) When counts involve 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. (c) When one of the counts embodies conduct that is treated as a specific offense characteristic in, or other adjustment to, the guideline applicable to another of the counts. (d)When the offense level is determined largely on the basis of the total amount of harm or loss, the quantity of a substance involved, or some other measure of aggregate harm, or if the offense behavior is ongoing or continuous in nature and the offense guideline is written to cover such behavior.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 370 F. Supp. 2d 661 - United States v. Coleman · 627 F. Supp. 2d 180 - United States v. Atlantic States Cast Iron Pipe Co.

2. “For offenses in which there are no identifiable victims {e.g., drug or immigration offenses, where society at large is the victim), the “victim” for purposes of subsections (a) and (b) is the societal interest that is harmed. In such cases, the counts are grouped together when the societal interests that are harmed are closely related. Where one count, for example, involves unlawfully entering the United States and the other involves possession of fraudulent evidence of citizenship, the counts are grouped together because the societal interests harmed (the interests protected by laws governing immigration) are closely related.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 370 F. Supp. 2d 661 - United States v. Coleman

3. “A position of trust is marked by substantial managerial discretion and fiduciary-like responsibilities-a position with supervisory authority and one which engenders considerable deference.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Douglas