United States v. Newman’s Empirical Analysis
6 F.3d 623 · 1993
Citation profile
53 federal appellate · 1 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 86 later decisions — most recently February 2025 · most notably State v. Low (2008), United States v. Morris (1996)
53 federal appellate · 1 district · 7 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. § 1855 · 18 U.S.C. § 3161 (§ 101 of the Speedy Trial Act of 1974) · 18 U.S.C. § 3162 (§ 101 of the Speedy Trial Act of 1974) · 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 18 U.S.C. § 3664 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · North Carolina v. Pearce · Burks v. United States · United States v. Scott · Miller v. Florida
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 86 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The court has broad discretion to determine the type and amount of evidence it deems relevant [to determining the amount of restitution to be paid].”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a different judge imposed a wholly logical sentence [and] at the first trial, the sentencing judge was different from the trial judge, while at the retrial, the same judge presided over the trial and the sentencing proceedings”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[The measure of loss] does not include consequential losses. If the Sentencing Commission had intended to include consequential losses, it would have included them in the definition of loss.”
2 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.