United States v. Lee’s Empirical Analysis
296 F.3d 792 · 2002
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1343 · 21 U.S.C. § 331 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act)
Relies on United States v. Harper · United States v. Green · United States v. Petersen · United States v. Mendoza · United States v. Mainard
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“adjustment under all circumstances. Computer skills cover a wide spectrum of ability. Only where a defendant's computer skills are particularly sophisticated do they correspond to the Sentencing Commission's examples of”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“two Porsches, $ 40,000, and two trips to Hawaii in a radio call-in contest. Id . Then he hacked into a national commercial lender's computer and had it wire $ 150,000 to him through two other banks. Id . at 505.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[d]espite Petersen's lack of formal training or licensing, his sophisticated computer skills reasonably can be equated to the skills possessed by pilots, lawyers, chemists, and demolition experts”
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.