Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 52 F.3d 489 - United States v. Hunter

United States v. Hunter’s Empirical Analysis

52 F.3d 489 · 1995

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
1
states following
June 2015
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently June 2015 · most notably United States v. Scott (2001), United States v. Diaz (2001)

11 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

160199520002010decided

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. § 1029 · 18 U.S.C. § 3572 · 18 U.S.C. § 3664

Relies on Nebraska v. Wyoming · United States v. Chaney · United States v. Palma · United States v. Ortiz · United States v. Cauwenberghe

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

  1. “(a) If the defendant was an organizer or leader of a criminal activity that involved five or more participants or was otherwise extensive, increase by 4 levels. (b) If the defendant was a manager or supervisor (but not an organizer or leader) and the criminal activity involved five or more participants or was otherwise extensive, increase by 3 levels. (c) If the defendant was an organizer, leader, manager, or supervisor in any criminal activity other than described in (a) or (b), increase by 2 levels.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(1) the exercise of decision making authority; (2) the nature of participation in the commission of the offense; (3) the recruitment of accomplices; (4) the claimed right to a larger share of the fruits of the crime; (5) the degree of participation in planning or organizing the offense; (6) the nature and scope of the illegal activity!.]”
    3 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.