United States v. Luttrell’s Empirical Analysis
889 F.2d 806 · 1989
Citation profile
54 federal appellate · 4 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 70 later decisions — most recently May 2018 · most notably United States v. Restrepo (1991), United States v. Garza-Juarez (1993)
54 federal appellate · 4 district · 4 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. § 1029
Relies on Rochin v. People of California · United States v. Russell · Olmstead v. United States · Mahan & Rowsey, Inc. v. Oklahoma Natural Gas · Pelaes v. United States
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 70 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“so grossly shocking and so outrageous as to violate the universal sense of justice.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“for an extended period of time, an actual and illegal apparatus.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“[C]onspiracy is established by an agreement to engage in criminal activity, one or more overt acts taken to implement the agreement, and the requisite intent to commit the substantive crime.”
2 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.