United States v. Ransfer’s Empirical Analysis
749 F.3d 914 · 2014
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently April 2025 · most notably George Havercombe v. Department of Education of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (2001), United States v. Holt (2015)
5 federal appellate · 1 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. § 1951 (Hobbs Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 924
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · Crawford v. Washington · Bruton 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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“To convict on a Hobbs Act conspiracy, the government must show that (1) two or more people agreed to commit a Hobbs Act robbery; (2) that the defendant knew of the conspiratorial goal; and (3) that the defendant voluntarily participated in furthering that goal.” United States v. Ransfer, 749 F.3d 914 , 930 (11th Cir. 2014). This Court”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re Pinder“Because rulings on motions to suppress involve mixed questions of fact and law, we review the district court's factual findings for clear error, and its application of the law to the facts de novo .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“all facts ... in the light most favorable to the prevailing party below.”
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.