United States v. De La Rosa’s Empirical Analysis
911 F.2d 985 · 1990
Citation profile
60 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 81 later decisions — most recently April 2012 · most notably United States v. Bermea (1994), United States v. Rocha (1990)
60 federal appellate · 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. § 10 · 18 U.S.C. § 1201 (International Parental Kidnapping Crime Act of 1993)
Relies on Batson v. Kentucky · Nicholas v. United States · Alexander v. United States · Amperex Electronic Corp. v. New York Racing Assn., Inc. · Foy v. Northeast Suburban Life
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 81 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(c) ‘Brandish’ with reference to a dangerous weapon (including a firearm) means that the weapon was pointed or waved about, or displayed in a threatening manner. (d) ‘Dangerous Weapon’ means an instrument capable of inflicting death or serious bodily injury. Where an object that appeared to be a dangerous weapon was brandished, displayed, or possessed, treat the object as a dangerous weapon____ (g) ‘Otherwise used’ with reference to a dangerous weapon (including a firearm) means the conduct did not amount to the discharge of a firearm, but was more than brandishing, displaying or possessing a firearm or other dangerous weapon.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a firearm. As is appropriate, we reviewed the district court's factual finding for clear error. We noted that testimony established that the defendant waved a gun during an argument and threatened those around her that anyone going to the police would have to deal with her. We then concluded that, as the defendant's conduct fit the guidelines' definition of”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]o establish a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1201 (a)(1), the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant 1) knowingly and willfully kidnapped the victim; 2) held him for ransom, reward or other benefit; and 3) transported him in interstate commerce.”
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.