Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 833 F.2d 1068 - United States v. Tarvers

United States v. Tarvers’s Empirical Analysis

833 F.2d 1068 · 1987

Citation profile

76
cited by 76 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
May 2016
most recently cited

63 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 76 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2016 · most notably Richardson v. United States (1999), United States v. Moya-Gomez (1988)

63 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions

4601987199020002010decided

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. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 843 (§ 403 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 848 (§ 408 of the Controlled Substances Act)

Relies on Kotteakos v. United States · Berger v. United States · Bourjaily v. United States · Bibby v. United States · Will 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 76 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “For purposes of subsection (a) of this section, a person is engaged in a continuing criminal enterprise if— (1) he violates any provision of this subchap-ter or subchapter II of this chapter the punishment for which is a felony, and (2) such violation is a part of a continuing series of violations of this subchapter or sub-chapter II of this chapter— (A) which are undertaken by such person in concert with five or more other persons with respect to whom such person occupies a position of organizer, a supervisory position, or any other position of management, and (B) from which such person obtains substantial income or resources.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The statute does not require that the means used to achieve the unlawful goal of the conspiracy be unlawful.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “occupies a position of organizer, a supervisory position, or any other position of management,”
    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.