United States v. Christopher Sutton’s Empirical Analysis
2010
Citation profile
1 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1344 · 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 31 U.S.C. § 5312 · 31 U.S.C. § 5313 · 31 U.S.C. § 5324 (§ 1354 of the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986)
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Gall v. United States · Crawford v. Washington · Bruton v. United States · Ohio v. Roberts
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) [T]he defendant must, in fact, have engaged in acts of structuring; (2) he must have done so with knowledge that the financial institutions involved were legally obligated to report currency transactions in excess of $10,000; and (3) he must have acted with the intent to evade this reporting requirement.”
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.