United States v. Adams’s Empirical Analysis
74 F.3d 1093 · 1996
Citation profile
27 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 60 later decisions — most recently September 2024 · most notably United States v. Eckhardt (2006), United States v. Ramirez (2005)
27 federal appellate ·
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. § 1001 (Comprehensive Thrift and Bank Fraud Prosecution and Taxpayer Recovery Act of 1990) · 18 U.S.C. § 1032 · 18 U.S.C. § 1956 (§ 1352 of the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 1957 (§ 1352 of the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 3551 (Mandatory Victims Restitution Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 18 U.S.C. § 657
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Bruton v. United States · Bonner v. City of Prichard · Richardson v. Marsh · Williams 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 60 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We agree with our colleagues in the First and Eighth Circuits that Congress intended to criminalize a broad array of money laundering activity,”
1 later decision 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.