United States v. Real-Hernandez’s Empirical Analysis
90 F.3d 356 · 1996
Citation profile
54 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 104 later decisions — most recently June 2024 · most notably United States v. Salgado (2001), United States v. Ticchiarelli (1999)
54 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 18 U.S.C. § 3742 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 848 (§ 408 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 952
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Giglio v. United States · Voinovich v. Quilter · Spencer Gifts, Inc. v. Olitsky · Griffin 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 104 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he district court ... must provide reasons for agreeing or refusing to apply section 5C1.2 at the time of sentencing.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“.... if the court finds that the defendant meets the [following] criteria ...: (1) the defendant does not have more than 1 criminal history point, as determined under the sentencing guidelines; (2) the defendant did not use violence or credible threats of violence or possess a firearm or other dangerous weapon (or induce another participant to do so) in connection with the offense; (3) the offense did not result in death or serious bodily injury to any person; (4) the defendant was not an organizer, leader, manager, or supervisor of others in the offense, as determined under the sentencing guidelines and was not engaged in a continuing criminal enterprise, as defined in 21 U.S.C. § 848 ; and (5) not later than the time of the sentencing hearing, the defendant has truthfully provided to the Government all information and evidence the defendant has concerning the offense or offenses that were part of the same course of conduct or of a common scheme or plan, but the fact that the defendant has no relevant or useful other information to provide or that the Government is already aware of the information shall not preclude a determination by the court that the defendant has complied with this requirement.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“district court's factual determination that a particular defendant qualifies for relief under section 3553(f).”
4 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.