Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 649 F.2d 950 - United States v. Lowell

United States v. Lowell’s Empirical Analysis

649 F.2d 950 · 1981

Citation profile

87
cited by 87 later decisions
2
states following
December 2015
most recently cited

56 federal appellate · 10 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 87 later decisions — most recently December 2015 · most notably United States v. Perez (2002), United States v. Read (1981)

56 federal appellate · 10 district · 2 state decisions

3401981199020002010decided

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. § 1510 · 18 U.S.C. § 1952 · 18 U.S.C. § 371

Relies on Chambers v. Mississippi · Pinkerton v. United States · Malloy v. Hogan · Hoffman v. United States · United States v. Di Re

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

  1. “[t]he burden is ... on the defendant to prove '(a)ffirmative acts inconsistent with the object of the conspiracy and communicated in a manner reasonably calculated to reach co-conspirators.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “be necessary for Lowell to raise this issue, if at all, in an appropriate motion under Fed.R.Crim.P. 33, to be presented in the first instance to the district court.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “denial of receipt of payment from [defendant], even if it were untrue, did not deprive his plea of guilty on the conspiracy charge of a `factual basis'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.