United States v. Miller’s Empirical Analysis
676 F.2d 359 · 1982
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently August 2014 · most notably United States v. Manarite (1995), United States v. Tille (1984)
17 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
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
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Mincey v. Arizona · Harris v. New York · Pereira 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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a] fraudulent scheme may depend on a mailing even after the defrauders have received their money”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“Where one does an act with knowledge that the use of the mails will follow in the ordinary course of business, or where such use can reasonably be foreseen, even though not actually intended, then he 'causes' the mails to be used.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[e]ven after [the defendant] took his `fee,' his scheme required the straw purchaser to deed that property back to the homeowner. Only then was the transaction complete.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.