United States v. Miller’s Empirical Analysis
903 F.2d 341 · 1990
Citation profile
79 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 90 later decisions — most recently August 2016 · most notably United States v. Whitebird (1995), United States v. Saccoccia (1995)
79 federal appellate ·
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. § 3582 · 18 U.S.C. § 3584 · 18 U.S.C. § 3742 · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 28 U.S.C. § 994
Relies on Alexander v. United States · McKesson Corp. v. Division of Alcoholic Beverages & Tobacco · United States v. Albertini · Youngberg v. United States · United States v. Mejia-Orosco
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 90 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“one or more of the instant offense(s) arose out of the same transactions or occurrences as the unexpired sentences,”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“§ 5G1.3. Imposition of a Sentence on a Defendant Serving an Unexpired Term of Imprisonment If the instant offense was committed while the defendant was serving a term of imprisonment (including work release, furlough, or escape status), the sentence for the instant offense shall be imposed to run consecutively to the unexpired term of imprisonment. Commentary Under this guideline, the court shall impose a consecutive sentence where the instant offense (or any part thereof) was committed while the defendant was serving an unexpired term of imprisonment. Where the defendant is serving an unexpired term of imprisonment, but did not commit the instant offense while serving that term of imprisonment, the sentence for the instant offense may be imposed to run consecutively or concurrently with the unexpired term of imprisonment. The court may consider imposing a sentence for the instant offense that results in a combined sentence that approximates the total punishment that would have been imposed under § 5G1.2 (Sentencing on Multiple Counts of Conviction) had all of the offenses been federal offenses for which sentences were being imposed at the same time. Where the defendant is serving a term of imprisonment for a state offense, the information available may permit only a rough estimate of the total punishment that would have been imposed under the guidelines. It is not intended that the above methodology be applied in a manner that unduly complicates or prolongs the sentencing pr”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[i]f the instant offense was committed while the defendant was serving a term of imprisonment (including work release, furlough, or escape status), the sentence for the instant offense shall be imposed to run consecutively to the unexpired term of imprisonment.”
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.