Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 3 F.3d 775 - United States v. Daniel

United States v. Daniel’s Empirical Analysis

3 F.3d 775 · 1993

Citation profile

52
cited by 52 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
March 2021
most recently cited

27 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 52 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2021 · most notably United States v. Jones (1994), United States of America v. Theresa Marie Squillacote (2000)

27 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

2601993200020102020decided

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 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act)

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · United States v. Russell · Mathews v. United States · Jacobson v. United States · Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Public Utilities Commission

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

  1. “involves elements of governmental overreaching and conduct sufficiently excessive to implant a criminal design in the mind of an otherwise innocent party.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[e]xcept as authorized by this subchapter, it shall be unlawful for any person knowingly or intentionally . . . to . . . distribute, or dispense, or possess with intent to . . . distribute, or dispense, a controlled substance.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “possess, manufacture, distribute, or dispense [controlled substances] to the extent authorized by their registration and in conformity with the other provisions of this subchapter.”
    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.