United States v. Sharp’s Empirical Analysis
883 F.2d 829 · 1989
Citation profile
92 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 121 later decisions — most recently June 2007 · most notably United States v. De la Fuente (1993), United States v. Heckard (2001)
92 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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. § 3013 · 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Mistretta v. United States · United States v. Anguiano · United States v. Klein · United States v. Kidder
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 121 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]hen a statute requires a sentence different than that set by the guidelines, the statute controls.”
14 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'defendant's substantial assistance in the investigation or prosecution of another person who has committed an offense.'”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“), following his conviction by guilty plea for bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113 (a). Walter claims the district court erred by concluding it did not have authority to depart below the Guidelines based on his childhood history of abuse. We lack jurisdiction to hear this appeal and we dismiss. 3 The district court may impose a sentence below the Guidelines range if it discerns a”
3 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.