United States v. Withrow’s Empirical Analysis
85 F.3d 527 · 1996
Citation profile
21 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2119 · 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 18 U.S.C. § 3742
Relies on Holm v. United States · Stewart v. Brown · Herman v. Department of Treasury · United States v. Carey · United States v. Fossett
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“All circuits that have addressed and resolved the question ... have concluded that single acts of aberrant behavior were excluded from consideration in the formulation of the guidelines and thus might justify sentences below the guideline range even in cases where probation is not a viable option.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[the defendant] and his companions drove around a parking lot with the express purpose of looking for a car to steal. During the time it took Withrow to locate a desirable vehicle to rob, he had an opportunity either to reflect upon the action he was about to take and withdraw or to devise a plan to commit the car theft. Choosing the latter option, Withrow pointed a gun to the driver’s head, entered the car, and pulled a stocking over his head to conceal his identity-”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The robberies that Premachandra committed were neither spontaneous nor thoughtless. To the contrary, the record indicates that the robberies were planned rather than impulsive. Premachandra took steps to avoid apprehension, wearing a facial disguise and covering the rear license plate of the getaway vehicle.”
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.