United States v. Jackson’s Empirical Analysis
2012
Citation profile
1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 18 U.S.C. § 3663A (§ 204 of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291
Relies on United States v. Kristl · United States v. Smart · United States v. Romero · United States v. Alapizco-Valenzuela · United States v. Angeles-Mendoza
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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Generally, this court is reluctant to relieve parties from the benefits or detriments of their stipulations.” In this case, Ms. Jackson’s stipulation concerning the loss amount waives any challenge contrary to the stipulation.... Finally, by stipulating to this loss amount on the day of the sentencing hearing, Ms. Jackson cannot now challenge those figures by claiming the government failed to provide evidence in support thereof at that hearing. Instead, her stipulation to the loss figures released the government from any obligation to set forth such evidence at the sentencing hearing.”
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.