United States v. Cseplo’s Empirical Analysis
42 F.3d 360 · 1994
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 162 · 26 U.S.C. § 7201 · 26 U.S.C. § 7206
Relies on Miller v. Florida · Davis v. United States · Truesdell v. Comm'r · United States v. Pierce · Kennedy v. Commissioner
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The court shall use the Guidelines Manual in effect on the date the defendant is sentenced ... [unless] the court determines that [this] would violate the ex post facto clause of the United States Constitution.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“ha[s] the opportunity and ability to limit the criminal consequences to one or other of the returns.... By choosing to falsify both returns, [he] ma[kes] the deliberate decision to produce separate harm to the government with respect to both tax liabilities.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[i]f [the defendant's] unorthodox maneuvers resulted in a higher aggregate tax liability than would have existed otherwise, that is a risk [he] chose to run when he elected to break the law”
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.