United States v. Smitherman’s Empirical Analysis
889 F.2d 189 · 1989
Citation profile
79 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 83 later decisions — most recently April 2003 · most notably United States v. La Guardia (1990), United States v. Streeter (1990)
79 federal appellate ·
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. § 3147 (Bail Reform Act of 1984) · 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 18 U.S.C. § 3584 · 18 U.S.C. § 3742 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on United Transportation Union v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority · Cimo v. Petty · Cordeiro v. United States · United States v. Justice
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.
“might not apply if the prosecution has acted with 'bad faith or arbitrariness that might conceivably present a due process issue.'”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Upon motion of the Government, the court shall have the authority to impose a sentence below a level established by statute as minimum sentence so as to reflect a defendant’s substantial assistance in the investigation or prosecution of another person who has committed an offense. Such sentence shall be imposed in accordance with the guidelines and policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission pursuant to section 994 of title 28, United States Code.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The Commission shall insure that the guidelines promulgated pursuant to subsection (a)(1) reflect— (1) the appropriateness of imposing an incremental penalty for each offense in a case in which a defendant is convicted of— (B) multiple offenses committed at different times, including those cases in which the subsequent offense is a violation of section 3146 (penalty for failure to appear) or is committed while the person is released pursuant to the provisions of section 3147 (penalty for an offense committed while on release) of title 18; ...”
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.