United States v. Harris’s Empirical Analysis
9 F.3d 493 · 1993
Citation profile
40 federal appellate · 2 district · 9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 84 later decisions — most recently October 2024 · most notably United States v. Voigt (1996), United States v. Tocco (2000)
40 federal appellate · 2 district · 9 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 21 U.S.C. § 843 (§ 403 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Carnegie v. United States · Bibby v. United States · Daniel v. Security Pacific National Bank · McNeil v. Wisconsin
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 84 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“As a general rule, we will not consider issues not presented to and considered by the district court.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) the character or reputation of the defendant, including any prior criminal record; 24 (2) whether the suggestion of the criminal activity was initially made by the Government; 25 (3) whether the defendant was engaged in the criminal activity for profit; 26 (4) whether the defendant evidenced reluctance to commit the offense, overcome only by repeated Government inducement or persuasion; and 27 (5) the nature of the inducement or persuasion supplied by the Government.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“absence of predisposition. If either of these elements is missing, then the predisposition question is for the jury to decide. 11 Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). In making this determination, all evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution. Id. 12”
3 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.