Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 39 F.3d 643 - United States v. Landers

United States v. Landers’s Empirical Analysis

39 F.3d 643 · 1994

Citation profile

96
cited by 96 later decisions
October 2013
most recently cited

65 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 96 later decisions — most recently October 2013 · most notably United States v. Salgado (2001), United States v. Prince (2000)

65 federal appellate ·

490199420002010decided

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. § 3582 · 18 U.S.C. § 3742 · 21 U.S.C. § 812 (§ 202 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act)

Relies on Stinson v. United States · Needler v. Valley National Bank of Arizona · Chapman v. United States · Brewster v. Derwinski · United States v. United States Gypsum Co.

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

  1. “incorrectly believed that [he] lacked any authority to consider defendant's mitigating circumstances as well as the discretion to deviate from the guidelines.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The Sentencing Commission's Notes and Commentary to the guidelines is authoritative and binding upon the courts unless such are inconsistent with the Constitution, a federal statute, or the guidelines themselves.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[u]nless otherwise specified, the weight of a controlled substance set forth in the table refers to the entire weight of any mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of the controlled substance.”
    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.