United States v. Evans’s Empirical Analysis
892 F.3d 692 · 2018
Citation profile
4 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 1347 (§ 242 of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 1957 (§ 1352 of the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 21 U.S.C. § 812 (§ 202 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 843 (§ 403 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Kotteakos v. United States · Delaware v. Van Arsdall · Davis v. Alaska · Puckett v. United States · Neder 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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“main evidence on the three convictions-the three patient files themselves-le[d] us to conclude that the jury could rationally find that [the three] prescriptions were written without a legitimate medical purpose and outside the usual course of professional practice,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“show aggregate withdrawals in excess of $10,000 above the amount of clean funds in the account to validate [the] money-laundering conviction[s].”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“as focusing on the evidence's connection to the particular patient, not the precise type of evidence.”
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.