United States v. Burrows’s Empirical Analysis
36 F.3d 875 · 1994
Citation profile
86 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 143 later decisions — most recently April 2025 · most notably United States v. Alexander (1995), United States v. Karterman (1995)
86 federal appellate · 1 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. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 851 (§ 411 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 26 U.S.C. § 7201
Relies on Gideon v. Wainwright · National Union Fire Insurance v. Helfand · Wade v. United States · Cheek v. United States · Custis v. United States
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 143 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a claim that [he has] provided substantial assistance”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he defendant may allege that he lacked criminal intent because he honestly believed he was performing the otherwise-criminal acts in cooperation with the government. “Innocent intent” is not a defense per se, but a defense strategy aimed at negating the mens rea for the crime, an essential element of the prosecution’s case....”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Section 5K1.1 deliberately removes from judges the determination of whether or not a given quantum of assistance is substantial, and leaves the decision to prosecutors.”
2 later decisions 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.