United States v. Ramírez-Rivera’s Empirical Analysis
800 F.3d 1 · 2015
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 9 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently January 2025 · most notably Wilder v. United States (2015), State v. Bush (2017)
11 federal appellate · 9 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. § 1959 · 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) · 18 U.S.C. § 1963 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1863
Relies on Illinois v. Gates · Wong Sun v. United States · Mapp v. Ohio · Coolidge v. New Hampshire · South Dakota v. Opperman
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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the existence of an enterprise affecting interstate [or foreign] commerce, (2) that the defendant knowingly joined the conspiracy to participate in the conduct of the affairs of the enterprise, (3) that the defendant participated in the conduct of the affairs of the enterprise, and (4) that the defendant did so through a pattern of racketeering activity' by agreeing to commit, or in fact committing, two or more predicate offenses.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“La Organización de Narcotraficantes Unidos”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In assessing whether there was probable cause for a search, '[the First Circuit's] task, like that of the ... district court, is simply to make a practical, common-sense decision whether, given all the circumstances, there is a fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found in a particular place.'”
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.