United States v. Hare’s Empirical Analysis
873 F.2d 796 · 1989
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 83 later decisions — most recently August 2023 · most notably United States v. Tortora (1990), United States v. Rueben (1992)
20 federal appellate · 5 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. § 3141 (Bail Reform Act of 1984) · 18 U.S.C. § 3142 (Bail Reform Act of 1984) · 18 U.S.C. § 3145 (Bail Reform Act of 1984) · 18 U.S.C. § 3161 (§ 101 of the Speedy Trial Act of 1974) · 21 U.S.C. § 801 (§ 101 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on United States v. Salerno · ITT Gilfillan v. Clayton · United States v. Jessup · United States v. Fortna
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 83 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“in making its ultimate determination, the court may still consider the finding by Congress that drug offenders pose a special risk of flight and dangerousness to society.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he hearing can be reopened if the court finds that information exists that was not known to the defendant at the time of the hearing and that has a material bearing on the issue that was decided.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In determining whether due process has been violated, a court must consider not only factors relevant in the initial detention decision, such as the seriousness of the charges, the strength of the government’s proof that the defendant poses a risk of flight or a danger to the community, and the strength of the government’s case on the merits, but also addi tional factors such as the length of the detention that has in fact occurred or may occur in the future, the non-speculative nature of future detention, the complexity of the case, and whether the strategy of one side or the other occasions the delay.”
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.