United States v. Bertling’s Empirical Analysis
611 F.3d 477 · 2010
Citation profile
10 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1503 · 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 18 U.S.C. § 371
Relies on United States v. Booker · Gall v. United States · Rita v. United States · Kimbrough v. United States · Sells 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“abused its discretion by relying on an 'improper' or ‘irrelevant’ factor in varying from [the defendants'] advisory guidelines ranges.” Id. at 480 . More specifically, the government asserted "that the district court improperly substituted its view of the evidence concerning the [defendants’] criminal intent for the jury’s verdict, which should have been conclusive on that issue.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the district court acted improperly in substituting its view of the evidence concerning [the defendants’] criminal intent for the jury’s verdict.” Id. at 481 . According to the court,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“'rely on a defendant's innocence when the defendant has already been found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt'”
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.