Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 86 F.3d 956 - United States v. Lacey

United States v. Lacey’s Empirical Analysis

86 F.3d 956 · 1996

Citation profile

116
cited by 116 later decisions
10
states following
December 2024
most recently cited

50 federal appellate · 10 district · 11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 116 later decisions — most recently December 2024 · most notably State v. Kelly (2001), United States of America v. Darhee Gray McKissick (2000)

50 federal appellate · 10 district · 11 state decisions — followed in 10 states

5501996200020102020decided

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. § 3146 (Bail Reform Act of 1984) · 18 U.S.C. § 3742 · 18 U.S.C. § 6002 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291

Relies on Chimel v. California · Ornelas v. United States · Irvin v. Dowd · New York v. Belton · Allen 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 116 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “whether, considering the totality of the circumstances in any given case, the government's conduct is so shocking, outrageous and intolerable that it offends the universal sense of justice.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Id. (quoting United States v. Mosley, 965 F.2d 906 , 908, 914 (10th Cir.1992)). 4 .”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[A]lthough [the evidence of other drug quantities] may not suffice to establish criminal liability under the reasonable doubt standard, that same evidence may nevertheless support a sentence enhancement under the less rigorous preponderance standard.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.