United States v. Sachdev’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 federal appellate · 3 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[T]he type and kind of evidence necessary to support a downward departure premised on duress is somewhat less than that necessary to support a defense of duress at trial.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Bravo · United States v. Cotto

2. “If the defendant committed the offense because of serious coercion, blackmail, or duress, under circumstances not amounting to a complete defense, the court may depart downward. The extent of the decrease ordinarily should depend on the reasonableness of the defendant's actions, on the proportionality of the defendant’s actions to the seriousness of coercion, blackmail, or duress involved, and on the extent to which the conduct would have been less harmful under the circumstances as the defendant believed them to be. Ordinarily coercion will be sufficiently serious to warrant departure only when it involves a threat of physical injury, substantial damage to property dr similar injury resulting from the unlawful action of a third party or from a natural emergency. Notwithstanding this policy statement, personal financial difficulties and economic pressures upon a trade or business do not warrant a downward departure.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 370 F. Supp. 2d 310 - United States v. Rooney

3. “objectively determine whether a reasonable person in defendant's position would perceive there to be a threat”

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