United States v. Sheikh’s Empirical Analysis
367 F.3d 756 · 2004
Citation profile
30 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently April 2021 · most notably United States v. Hassan (2008), United States v. Frazier (2005)
30 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
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. § 2 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 843 (§ 403 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Kolender v. Lawson · United States v. Mazurie · United States v. Griffin · United States v. Hamilton · United States v. Axsom
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.
“We review suppression issues under a two-pronged standard of review: the district court's factual findings are reviewed for clear error; its legal conclusions are reviewed de novo.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“). D. Motion for Judgment of Acquittal 35 Plumman contends the district court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal. Plumman argues the evidence adduced at trial was legally insufficient for a jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“We review de novo the sufficiency of the evidence, examining the evidence in the light most favorable to the jury verdict and giving the verdict the benefit of all reasonable inferences.”
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.