United States v. Tille’s Empirical Analysis
729 F.2d 615 · 1984
Citation profile
94 federal appellate · 4 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 130 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2021 · most notably Salinas v. United States (1997), United States v. Pungitore (1990)
94 federal appellate · 4 district · 5 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1961 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 1962 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act)
Relies on Bruton v. United States · Ohio v. Roberts · United States v. Turkette · Dutton v. Evans · S.S. Zoe Colocotroni v. Puerto Rico
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 130 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Proof of an agreement the objective of which is a substantive violation of RICO (such as conducting the affairs of an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering) is sufficient to establish a violation of section 1962(d). It is only when proof of such an objective is lacking that the evidence must establish the defendant’s participation or agreement to participate in two predicate offenses.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) whether the statements are assertions of past fact, (2) whether the declarant had personal knowledge concerning the crime, (3) the possibility of faulty recollection, and (4) whether the circumstances suggest that the declarant misrepresented the defendant’s role____ All four indicators need not be present.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[i]t shall be unlawful for any person to conspire to violate any of the provisions of subsection (a), (b) or (c) of this section.”
2 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.