United States v. Redcorn’s Empirical Analysis
528 F.3d 727 · 2008
Citation profile
23 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 57 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2024 · most notably United States v. Hernandez (2011), United States v. Lewis (2010)
23 federal appellate · 3 district · 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 15 U.S.C. § 1012 (§ 2 of the McCarran-Ferguson Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 1343 · 18 U.S.C. § 1957 (§ 1352 of the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 24 (§ 241 of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 42 · 18 U.S.C. § 669 (§ 243 of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996)
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Booker · Blakely v. Washington · Rita v. United States · Hamling v. United States
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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the evidence was discovered after trial, (2) the failure to learn of the evidence was not caused by [his] own lack of diligence, (3) the new evidence is not merely impeaching, (4) the new evidence is material to the principal issues involved, and (5) the new evidence is of such a nature that in a new trial it would probably produce an acquittal.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he defendant need not have made the transmission personally, merely caused it to be made. It need not be at the heart of a scheme, nor necessary or even helpful for its success; it need not itself be false or deceptive.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“‘Each count in an indictment is regarded as if it was a separate indictment.’ ” (quoting Powell, 469 U.S. at 62 , 105 S.Ct. 471 )); United States v. Pisman, 443 F.3d 912, 914 (7th Cir.2006) (noting that Powell”
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.