United States v. Hanson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 district ·

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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(1) [t]he nature and circumstances of the offense charged, including whether the offense ... involves ... a controlled substance; (2) the weight of evidence against the person; (3) the history and characteristics of the person, including ... the person’s character, physical and mental condition, family ties, employment, financial resources, length of residence in the community, community ties, past conduct, history relating to drug or alcohol abuse, criminal history, and record concerning appearance at court proceedings; and (4) the nature and seriousness of the danger to any person or the community that would be posed by the person’s release.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Muschetta · United States v. Sheffield

2. “The Bail Reform Act of 1984 sets forth the limited circumstances in which a defendant may be detained before trial despite the presumption in favor of liberty. The Act provides that if a judicial officer finds by clear and convincing evidence that “no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure ... the safety of any other person and the community, such judicial officer shall order the detention of the [defendant] before trial.” 18 U.S.C. § 3142 (e). The Act also provides for pretrial detention when the Court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appearance of the defendant in court as required. See 18 U.S.C. § 3142 (e); United States v. Simpkins, 826 F.2d 94, 96 (D.C.Cir.1987).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 909 F. Supp. 2d 4 - United States v. Hitselberger

3. “A motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3145 (b) for review of a magistrate judge’s detention order requires the Court promptly to examine de novo whether there are conditions of release that will reasonably assure the safety of any other person and the community. “The Court is free to use in its analysis any evidence or reasons relied on by the magistrate judge, but it may also hear additional evidence and rely on its own reasons.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 962 F. Supp. 2d 212 - United States v. Hubbard