Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 759 F.2d 659 - United States v. Thomas

United States v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis

759 F.2d 659 · 1985

Citation profile

86
cited by 86 later decisions
2
states following
May 2018
most recently cited

67 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 86 later decisions — most recently May 2018 · most notably United States v. DeLuna (1985), United States v. Garcia-Rosa (1989)

67 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 state decisions

4101985199020002010decided

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. § 2314 · 18 U.S.C. § 371

Relies on Blockburger v. United States · Ashe v. Swenson · Patterson v. United States · Braverman v. United States · Linkletter v. Walker

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 86 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[t]he fact that both indictments charge some of the same statutory violations is not particularly important. It is possible to have two different conspiracies to commit exactly the same type of crime.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““The following factors are normally considered in determining whether one or two conspiracies are involved: (1) time; (2) persons acting as co-conspirators; (3) the statutory offenses charged in the indictments; (4) the overt acts charged by the government or any other description of the offenses charged which indicate the nature and the scope of the activity which the government sought to punish in each case; and (5) places where the events alleged as part of the conspiracy took place.... These factors are guidelines only. The essence of the determination is whether there is one agreement to commit two crimes, or more than one agreement, each with a separate object.” (Citation omitted).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The essence of a conspiracy is the agreement, and once a defendant’s participation has been established he is culpable for everything said or done by any of the other conspirators in furtherance of the conspiracy.”
    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.