United States v. George’s Empirical Analysis
363 F.3d 666 · 2004
Citation profile
21 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1344 · 18 U.S.C. § 1957 (§ 1352 of the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 513 · 18 U.S.C. § 6002 · 18 U.S.C. § 6003
Relies on Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. · Batson v. Kentucky · Washington v. Texas · Hoffman v. United States · Webb v. Texas
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Whoever ... knowingly engages ... in a monetary transaction in criminally derived property of a value greater than $10,000 and is derived from specified unlawful activity, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the government's proffered reason for the strike need not be particularly persuasive, or even based on quantifiable data, so long as it is not pretextual”
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.