United States v. Conner’s Empirical Analysis
537 F.3d 480 · 2008
Citation profile
31 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 63 later decisions — most recently May 2022 · most notably United States v. Evans (2009), United States v. Doublin (2009)
31 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. § 1029 · 18 U.S.C. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 3553
Relies on Stinson v. United States · United States v. Cisneros-Gutierrez · United States v. Rodriguez · United States v. Dukagjini · United States v. Lara-Velasquez
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 63 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Credits Against Loss.—Loss shall be reduced by the following: (i) The money returned, and the fair market value of the property returned and the services rendered, by the defendant or other persons acting jointly with the defendant, to the victim before the offense was detected .... (ii) In a case involving collateral pledged or otherwise provided by the defendant, the amount the victim has recovered at the time of sentencing from disposition of the collateral, or if the collateral has not been disposed of by that time the fair market value of the collateral at the time of sentencing.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the sine qua non of deliberate ignorance is the conscious action of the defendant — the defendant consciously attempted to escape confirmation of the conditions or events he strongly suspected to exist. Where the choice is simply between a version of the facts in which the defendant had actual knowledge, and one in which he was no more than negligent or stupid, the deliberate ignorance instruction is inappropriate.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“We review the district court's interpretation and application of the Guidelines de novo and its factual findings for clear error.”
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.