United States v. Mitchell’s Empirical Analysis
893 F.2d 935 · 1990
Citation profile
57
cited by 57 later decisions
1
states following
December 2007
most recently cited
49 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 656
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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the amount of the loss sustained by any victim as a result of the offense, the financial resources of the defendant, the financial needs and earning ability of the defendant and the defendant's dependents, and such other factors as the court deems appropriate.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[i]f, at some later time, the defendant's financial condition somehow changes, either the government or the defendant can return to the sentencing court and ask it to modify its order.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“of paying restitution ordered). 12 Accordingly, the restitution order is vacated and the case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. 1 The defense argued that the total value of the stolen items was the insured value of the jewelry plus the value of the fast food gift certificates, or $11,423.22, because the jewelry was stolen from wholesalers. The government argued that the”
1 later decision 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.