United States v. George’s Empirical Analysis
779 F.3d 113 · 2015
Citation profile
4 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1581 · 18 U.S.C. § 3571 · 18 U.S.C. § 982 (§ 1366 of the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986) · 26 U.S.C. § 7201 · 8 U.S.C. § 1324 (§ 274 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · United States v. Booker · Johnson v. United States · Neder v. United States · Cupp v. Naughten
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the essence of the crime of the defendant and its relation to other criminal activity, (2) whether the defendant fits into the class of persons for whom the statute was principally designed, (3) the maximum sentence and fine that could have been imposed, and (4) the nature of the harm caused by the defendant’s conduct.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A jury instruction is erroneous if it either fails adequately to inform the jury of the law or misleads the jury as to the correct legal standard.”
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.