United States v. Mitchell’s Empirical Analysis
613 F.3d 862 · 2010
Citation profile
10 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1956 (§ 1352 of the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 3742
Relies on United States v. Santos · United States v. St. Cyr · Graber v. Fuqua · United States v. Warshawsky · United States v. Diaz-Diaz
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We review for abuse of discretion the district court's formulations of jury instructions.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“We will reverse if the failure to properly instruct the jury was prejudicial.”
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.