United States v. MacPherson’s Empirical Analysis
424 F.3d 183 · 2005
Citation profile
22 federal appellate · 2 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 90 later decisions — most recently April 2022 · most notably Walczyk v. Rio (2007), United States v. Florez (2006)
22 federal appellate · 2 district · 5 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. § 1954 · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 31 U.S.C. § 5312 · 31 U.S.C. § 5313 · 31 U.S.C. § 5322 · 31 U.S.C. § 5324 (§ 1354 of the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986)
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · United States v. Booker · Sedima Sprl v. Imrex Company Inc · Ratzlaf et Ux United States · California Bankers Assn. v. Shultz
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 90 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the 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.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[A] person structures a transaction if that person ... conducts or attempts to conduct one or more transactions in currency, in any amount, at one or more financial institutions, on one or more days, in any manner, for the purpose of evading the reporting requirements under section 103.22 of this part. “In any manner” includes, but is not limited to, the breaking down of a single sum of currency exceeding $10,000 into smaller sums, including sums at or below $10,000, or the conduct of a transaction, or series of currency transactions, including transactions at or below $10,000. The transaction or transactions need not exceed the $10,000 reporting threshold at any single financial institution on any single day in order to constitute structuring within the meaning of this definition.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“No person shall, for the purpose of evading the reporting requirements of section 5313(a) ... cause or attempt to cause a domestic financial institution to fail to file a report required under section 5313(a) ... [or] structure or assist in structuring, or attempt to structure or assist in structuring, any transaction with one or more domestic financial institutions.”
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.