United States v. Isom’s Empirical Analysis
886 F.2d 736 · 1989
Citation profile
85 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 108 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2012 · most notably United States v. Watts (1997), Schiro Farley Superintendent Indiana State Prison et al (1994)
85 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 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. § 3551 (Mandatory Victims Restitution Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 18 U.S.C. § 471 (Counterfeit Deterrence Act of 1992) · 18 U.S.C. § 473
Relies on United States v. Urrego-Linares · Martell v. United States · United States v. Sweig · United States v. Juarez-Ortega
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 108 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“sentencing court was not relying on [the acquitted-count conduct] to punish the defendant for the extraneous offense, but to justify the heavier penalties for the offenses for which he was convicted”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a]cquittal does not have the effect of conclusively establishing the untruth of all of the evidence introduced against the defendant.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a verdict of acquittal demonstrates only a lack of proof beyond a reasonable doubt; it does not necessarily establish the defendant's innocence.”
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.