United States v. Metcalf’s Empirical Analysis
898 F.2d 43 · 1990
Citation profile
55 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Nicholas v. United States · United States v. Roberson · United States v. White · United States v. Buckner · United States of v. Barnes
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 66 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Moreover, we do not believe that sentencing on two distinct cases on the same day necessitates a finding that they are consolidated. Here, the 1982 and 1983 offenses proceeded to sentencing under separate docket numbers and there was no order of consolidation. 14 Id. at 46 (citations omitted) (emphasis added). 15 We confronted a similar argument in United States v. Gipson, 46 F.3d 472 (5th Cir.1995). There the defendant argued that his seven prior robbery convictions were related under § 4A1.2(a)(2) because they were all”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[s]imply because two convictions have concurrent sentences.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“crack cocaine is one type of cocaine base.”
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.