Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 902 F.2d 1508 - United States v. Fox

United States v. Fox’s Empirical Analysis

902 F.2d 1508 · 1990

Citation profile

191
cited by 191 later decisions
2
states following
April 2021
most recently cited

125 federal appellate · 17 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 191 later decisions — most recently April 2021 · most notably United States v. Bw Evans (1992), United States v. Ivy (1996)

125 federal appellate · 17 district · 3 state decisions

14001990200020102020decided

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. § 1952 · 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act)

Relies on Glasser v. United States · Kotteakos v. United States · Beck v. State of Ohio · New York v. Belton · United States v. Watson

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 191 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “that two or more persons agreed to violate the law, that the defendant knew at least the essential objectives of the conspiracy, ... that the defendant knowingly and voluntarily became a part of it,”
    16 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “We review the entire record in the light most favorable to the government to determine whether the evidence, both direct and circumstantial, together with the reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom, is such that a reasonable jury could find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[I]nterdependence exists where each [coconspirator's] activities constituted essential and integral steps toward the realization of a common, illicit goal.”
    6 later decisions 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.