Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 879 F.2d 1247 - United States v. Rivera

United States v. Rivera’s Empirical Analysis

879 F.2d 1247 · 1989

Citation profile

73
cited by 73 later decisions
1
states following
March 2012
most recently cited

64 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 73 later decisions — most recently March 2012 · most notably United States v. Reid (1990), United States v. Stroud (1990)

64 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

5601989199020002010decided

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. § 3553 · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 18 U.S.C. § 3742 · 8 U.S.C. § 1324 (§ 274 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))

Relies on Santobello v. New York · United States v. Security Industrial Bank · Thomas v. United States · United States v. Rodgers · United States v. Mejia-Orosco

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 73 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “does not adequately reflect the seriousness of the defendant's past criminal conduct or the likelihood that the defendant will commit other crimes.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “"Whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact, or makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or representations, or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or entry, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.””
    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.