United States v. Burroughs’s Empirical Analysis
5 F.3d 192 · 1993
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently July 2019 · most notably United States v. Salgado (2001), Asplundh Tree Expert Co. v. Bates (1995)
24 federal appellate · 1 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. § 1343
Relies on Baldasar v. Illinois · Wrenn v. Weinberger · Wetherell v. De Grandy · Stephens v. Secretary · Drabkin v. Grant
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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“planned the scam, obtained required input numbers, and made all arrangements other than causing the actual transmissions that produced the money”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“one panel of this [C]ourt is not bound by dicta in a previously published panel opinion.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.