Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 71 F.3d 539 - United States v. Johnson

United States v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

71 F.3d 539 · 1995

Citation profile

42
cited by 42 later decisions
April 2023
most recently cited

16 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently April 2023 · most notably United States v. Bostic (2004), United States v. Tocco (2000)

16 federal appellate · 2 district ·

1801995200020102020decided

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. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002) · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)

Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Department of Revenue of Montana v. Ranch · Bonanno v. United States · United States v. Moore · Byrne 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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[i]n view of the fact that the defendant will be resentenced, the District Court should make more specific findings as to whether defendant has 'an extraordinary physical impairment,' or combination of impairments, worthy of departure.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[f]amily ties and responsibilities . . . are not ordinarily relevant in determining whether a sentence should be outside the guidelines.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “In order to obtain a conviction under 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1) against a licensed physician such as defendant, the government must show: '(1) That defendant distributed a controlled substance; (2) That he acted intentionally or knowingly; and (3) That defendant prescribed the drug without a legitimate medical purpose and outside the course of professional practice.'”
    3 later decisions 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.