United States v. Paiz’s Empirical Analysis
905 F.2d 1014 · 1990
Citation profile
108 federal appellate · 4 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 145 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2016 · most notably Gozlon-Peretz v. United States (1991), United States v. Townsend (1991)
108 federal appellate · 4 district · 3 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 18 U.S.C. § 1952 · 18 U.S.C. § 3583 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Kotteakos v. United States · Pinkerton v. United States · Carnegie v. United States · Missouri v. Continential Insurance Cos. · United States v. Powell
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 145 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A] conspiracy variance claim amounts to a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the jury's finding that each defendant was a member of the same conspiracy. Whether a single conspiracy exists is a question of fact; consequently '[t]he jury gets first crack at deciding "whether there is one conspiracy or several when the possibility of a variance appears.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage“If there is one overall agreement among various partners to perform different functions in order to carry out the objectives of the conspiracy, the agreement constitutes a single conspiracy.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“the defendant acknowledges her association with the group but, despite circumstantial evidence to the contrary, denies knowledge of the group's illegal activity”
3 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.