United States v. Skipper’s Empirical Analysis
74 F.3d 608 · 1996
Citation profile
52 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 90 later decisions — most recently September 2024 · most notably United States v. Asibor (1997), Green v. Administrators of the Tulane Educational Fund (2002)
52 federal appellate · 2 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 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 844 (§ 404 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2106
Relies on Turner v. United States · Nantahala Power & Light Co. v. Thornburg · Carolco Television Inc. v. National Broadcasting Co. · Young v. United States ex rel. Vuitton · Boston Firefighters Union, Local 718 v. Boston Chapter, NAACP
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 90 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Because this quantity [2.89 grams of crack cocaine] is not clearly inconsistent with personal use, however, we hold as a matter of law that this quantity alone is insufficient to prove intent [to distribute].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[E]ven if we find an abuse of discretion in the admission or exclusion of evidence, we review the error under the harmless error doctrine.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“In a harmless error examination, `[w]e must view the error, not in isolation, but in relation to the entire proceedings.'”
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.