Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 306 F.3d 540 - United States v. Tschebaum

United States v. Tschebaum’s Empirical Analysis

306 F.3d 540 · 2002

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
September 2021
most recently cited

15 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently September 2021

15 federal appellate ·

160200220102020decided

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. § 1001 (Comprehensive Thrift and Bank Fraud Prosecution and Taxpayer Recovery Act of 1990) · 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 18 U.S.C. § 3565 · 18 U.S.C. § 3742 · 26 U.S.C. § 7203

Relies on Negron v. United States · Schlossberg v. Maryland Comptroller of the Treasury · Koskela v. King County · United States v. Teran · United States v. Shaw

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

  1. “10 Here the district court determined Jasper's violations were Grade C and his criminal history category was VI. The court took note of the suggested sentencing range of 8-14 months under Chapter 7, but concluded the suggested range did not adequately reflect the seriousness of the violations. In so doing, the court was”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Although the court need not mechanically `list every consideration of § 3553(a) when it sentences a defendant,' it is `important ... that there is evidence that the court has considered the relevant matters, and that some reason is stated for the court's decision.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “`not required to make the explicit, detailed findings required when it departs upward from a binding guideline' because the policy statements in chapter 7 are only advisory.”
    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.