United States v. Hunt’s Empirical Analysis
749 F.2d 1078 · 1984
Citation profile
57 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 80 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2014 · most notably Jacobson v. United States (1992), United States v. Love (1985)
57 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 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. § 1952 · 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 Jackson v. Virginia · Ohio v. Roberts · Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory · California v. Green · United States v. Turkette
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 80 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'[i]t is sufficient if the defendant is of a frame of mind such that once his attention is called to the criminal opportunity, his decision to commit the crime is the product of his own preference and not the product of government persuasion.'”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[h]aving 'opened the door' the defendant may not be heard to complain of testimony which proved adverse to his position”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the essential element of the entrapment defense is the defendant's lack of predisposition to commit the crime charged.”
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.