United States v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis
884 F.2d 540 · 1989
Citation profile
70 federal appellate · 4 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 89 later decisions — most recently December 2020 · most notably United States v. Mondello (1991), United States v. Sanchez (1990)
70 federal appellate · 4 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. § 3551 (Mandatory Victims Restitution Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 991 · 28 U.S.C. § 994
Relies on Lockett v. Ohio · Mistretta v. United States · United States v. Batchelder · Delaware v. New York · Hallstrom v. Tillamook County
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 89 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]his argument merely restates the claim of a right to a discretionary assessment of an appropriate sentence, which we have already rejected. Further, the Supreme Court has recognized that the prosecutor has broad discretion to determine what charges to bring. When the evidence against a defendant will support conviction under more than one statute, ... "[t]he prosecutor may be influenced by the penalties available upon conviction, but this fact, standing alone, does not give rise to a violation of the equal protection or due process clause."”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Procedurally, the only difference between the sentencing process under the guidelines and the prior indetermin'te sentencing system is the reduction of the sentencing court’s discretion.... The guidelines define explicitly the means by which a court should determine a sentence, and require a sentencing court to justify any departure. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (c). A defendant ‘has the right to appear, to offer evidence, and to challenge the Government’s evidence.’ ””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he prosecutor may be influenced by the penalties available upon conviction, but this fact, standing alone, does not give rise to a violation of the equal protection or due process clause.”
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.