United States v. Concha’s Empirical Analysis
294 F.3d 1248 · 2002
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2020
8 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. § 113 · 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 924
Relies on Koon v. United States · Burns v. United States · United States v. Collins · United States v. Whiteskunk · United States v. Concha
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) whether the factual circumstances supporting a departure are permissible departure factors; (2) whether the departure factors relied upon by the district court remove the defendant from the applicable Guideline heartland thus warranting a departure; (3) whether the record sufficiently supports the factual basis underlying the departure; and (4) whether the degree of departure is reasonable.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The guidelines specifically provide that, in calculating a defendant’s criminal history score, sentences resulting from convictions that “have been ruled constitutionally invalid in a prior case are not to be counted.” U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2, comment. (n.6). Significantly, however, the application note further provides that “[n]onetheless, the criminal conduct underlying any conviction that is not counted in the criminal history score may be considered pursuant to § 4A1.3 (Adequacy of Criminal History Category).” * * # * This guideline renders misplaced Mr. Concha’s reliance upon Strachan v. Army Clemency & Parole Bd. 151 F.3d 1308 (10th Cir.1998). In that case, we held an invalid conviction could not support the forfeiture of street time upon revocation of parole, a matter not subject to the sentencing guidelines. Here, to the contrary, the use of conduct underlying an invalid conviction is specifically permitted during sentencing in determining whether to depart on the basis of inadequate criminal history.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“If reliable information indicates that the criminal history category does not adequately reflect the seriousness of the' defendant’s past criminal conduct or the likelihood that the defendant will commit other crimes, the court may consider imposing a sentence departing from the otherwise applicable guideline range.”
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.