United States v. Venable’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

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) a prosecutor’s decision to offer immunity to an equally culpable defendant because that defendant may choose to cooperate and expose more criminal activity; (2) the strength of the evidence against a particular defendant; (3) the defendant’s role in the crime; (4) whether the defendant is being prosecuted by state authorities; (5) the defendant’s candor and willingness to plead guilty; (6) the amount of resources required to convict a defendant; (7) the extent of prosecutorial resources; (8) the potential impact of a prosecution on related investigations and prosecutions; and (9) prosecu-torial priorities for addressing specific types of illegal conduct.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Young · Ingram v. U.S. of Amercia

2. “commercial burglaries, home invasión armed robberies, arsons and other crimes at convenience stores, gas stations, financial institutions, restaurants[,] homes and liquor stores,” in which "[slates and ATMs ’are primarily targeted and taken,” and "PJottery tickets and cigarettes are also taken along with other valuables”) (saved as ECF opinion attachment). 6 . Appellants allege that ATF 'was "willfully blind” to the racially disparate impact of its stash house sting operations; however, willful blindness does not evince discriminatory intent, as "discriminatory intent implies that the government ‘selected or reaffirmed a particular course of action at. least in part because of, not merely in spite of, its adverse effects upon an identifiable group.’”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Hare

3. “legitimate prosecutorial factors that might justify making different prosecutorial decisions with respect to [different defendants].”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Ingram v. U.S. of Amercia