United States v. Fregoso’s Empirical Analysis
60 F.3d 1314 · 1995
Citation profile
70 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 89 later decisions — most recently November 2024 · most notably United States v. Darden (1995), United States v. Page (2000)
70 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 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. § 2511 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2518 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 3122 (§ 301 of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 3123 (§ 301 of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 3127 (§ 301 of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Pinkerton v. United States · Smith v. Maryland · Scott v. United States · United States v. New York Telephone Co. · Nebraska v. Wyoming
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 89 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“This case requires us to address, as a matter of first impression, whether a sentencing court, when determining the applicable sentencing range for an individual convicted of conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute controlled substances, can, under the United States Sentencing Guidelines and 21 U.S.C. § 841 (b), include in its quantity calculations drugs possessed for personal consumption.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the government need only establish a tacit understanding between the parties, and this may be shown wholly through the circumstantial evidence of [the defendant's] actions.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[W]e must resolve issues of credibility in favor of the verdict, and we decline to invade the province of the jury as [Cottier] would have us do.”
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.