Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 89 F.3d 368 - United States v. Pullen

United States v. Pullen’s Empirical Analysis

89 F.3d 368 · 1996

Citation profile

46
cited by 46 later decisions
March 2007
most recently cited

33 federal appellate · 1 district ·

Relationships

Relies on Koon v. United States · Mistretta v. United States · United States v. Cantu · United States v. Daly · United States v. Vela

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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “present to an exceptional degree or in some other way [that] makes the case different from the ordinary case where the factor is present.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “indispensable to furthering the `fundamental goal of the Sentencing Reform Act, which is to place federal sentencing on an objective, uniform, and rational (or at least articulable, nonintuitive) basis.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “circumstances indicating a disadvantaged upbringing”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.